Showing posts with label god culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label god culture. Show all posts

Monday, January 8, 2024

The God Culture: Exclusive Interview With The God Culture

Recently my lovely assistant sat down with Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture for an in-depth interview. What follows is the transcript.

Exclusive Interview With The God Culture

Tonight we have a very special guest, Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture. We will be diving deep into his doctrines.  Get ready because this interview will blow you away. 

How are you tonight Mr. Schwab?

0:29 Doing Great.

Unlocking Hidden Truths with The God Culture - Zen Garcia & Tim Schwab 

That's good to hear. So, you are an American who moved to the Philippines not too long ago. Tell us about what it meant for you to relocate to the Philippines. 

2:11:00 You know, I have been here in the Philippines now for about eight years. Even becoming a  citizen and you can call me Petros. Nah, keep calling me the same thing. But you know I fell in love with this country a long time ago first with a beautiful woman who changed my life and just observing the culture of her and her mother and the way the Philippine people operate as opposed to the average American way....wow! I mean this has just been amazing.

But I had no idea where that would lead. You know, we moved here to the Philippines we weren't exactly sure what we were going to do. Right? I mean it was a big move. As an American I can't just go down the street and get a job too easy. So what do I do right? I'm not going to work in a rice field so uh but you know Yahuah has given us a vision and he's provided every step of the way. 

https://www.facebook.com/sabbathbc.congregation/videos/848713996196488

You say you became a Philippine citizen does that mean you gave up your American citizenship? Are you no longer an American citizen?

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

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

We all know that you did not move to the Philippines to work in a rice field. Instead you ended up working on a video series and then you published a number of books. Tell us about the vision for the Philippines that God has given you. 

21:08 This is why Yahusha said this land will restore his law. This land will rise against the final generation (kingdom?). It's why Isaiah said His law will be restored in this land. Why just the Philippines? It's not just the Philippines, it's the land of creation, the land of the Garden of Eden, the land of his Holy of Holies. His presence is here. You know, one thing you wonder and a lot of the world wonders and, I don't know, I'm sure there's studies that show somebody else somewhere, to me Filipinos are the happiest people on earth. At some point you've been conquered and raped and stolen from and all of these things in history in the last 400 years or so and yet you're still the happiest people on earth. Why? Because you are just above the Holy of Holies above Yahuah. That's why. Wow.

https://www.facebook.com/sabbathbc.congregation/videos/2216671111842774

Tell us more about what you mean by "restoring the law." Is it not true Jesus Christ came to free us from the law by fulfilling it? Certainly there is no temple in Israel.

22:08 Obviously there is no temple in Israel today so no actual need to go there although certainly visit that's fine. But we don't need that anymore. In fact watch our Solomon's Gold series and you will find His Holy of Holies on earth has always been put permanently in the Garden of Eden which we locate in the Philippines. And the one in Israel was very temporary of course. Thus everyone should really travel to  the Philippines for these feasts. How about that? Something to think about. And this is why we say that the Philippines is where they will reinstate these feasts in full especially.
But if there is no temple how can one keep the feasts in full since they are to be kept in the place God designated which is at the temple? And what about not knowing the correct dates on which God says to keep them? Is that not a problem? Can one really keep the feasts if they are not being kept in the right place at the right time?
1:09:59 But no one has these dates a hundred percent that we can verify including us, uh, so don't beat people up over oh well you do it this day oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, don't do that. The point, keep the feast.

The Feast of Tabernacles: Sukkot, A Shadow Of Things To Come. Feasts of YHWH Series

You said that the Holy of Holies is in the Garden of Eden which is in the Philippines. Where in the Philippines is the Garden of Eden located?

34:36 So, there you go. The Garden of Eden is just below the Philippines under the Sulu Sea.

Where is the Garden of Eden? Answers In Jubilees: Part 8

The Garden of Eden is under the Sulu Sea? That sounds inaccessible and uninhabitable.

29:07 So there you go. New revelation. Elijah just as Enoch was also taken into the Garden of Eden where the two of them remain.  Wonder what they're doing? Well, they are priests. They're just as a temple priest in the Holy of Holies because they are in the permanent Holy of Holies of Yahuah. Now, we know Enoch was sacrificing even burnt offerings according to the book of Jubilees we covered so essentially they took the place of Adam who was a priest in the garden. He was keeping the garden. It is clear this is the case and these two continue to live and serve Yahuah there. They remain holy and will to the end.

Where Are Enoch and Elijah Now? Not Heaven. Answers In First Enoch: Part 28

Wow! Enoch and Elijah are sacrificing burnt offerings in The Garden of Eden underneath the Sulu Sea below the Philippines? Does that mean there are animals living in the Garden of Eden? Can we enter the garden and visit Enoch and Elijah? 

27:39 You and I, however, can't enter but it will be open to us again in the end on the day of judgment. 

Where Are Enoch and Elijah Now? Not Heaven. Answers In First Enoch: Part 28

Aside from being the location of the Holy of Holies on earth what is it that makes the Philippines so special in the last days?

2:13:51  Because Jesus, Yahusha, said Himself that the Philippines will rise in the last days and stand against the New World Order, the one world government. The Philippines! Can you imagine that? Start. Because it's coming soon. His prophecies never return unto him void. 

https://www.facebook.com/sabbathbc.congregation/videos/848713996196488

It seems rather exciting to imagine that the Philippines will be rising up to fight against the New World Order. Tell us more about that. 
1:31:53 The Two Witnesses are coming and they will stand in the strongest of ways and we do believe that will be the first three and a half years of the tribulation when many will rise all over the world against the corruption. But the two lands which will lead this charge will be Kurdistan and Philippines according to the words of Yahusah Himself. And the Two Witnesses will come from there as well.  
In other words other governments around the earth will be preparing for the rise of their Messiah.  They already are.  The Beast or the anti-christ, the anti-Messiah to some, also known as the Mahdi in Islam, Maitreya in the New Age mythos, and the Jewish Messiah to come as well who is not Yahusha who they reject even still, who already came.  
But these two lands, Kurdistan, Philippines, will rise against that final generation and condemn it in Messiah's words. That means they will lead a charge to repentance all over the world. Though two of them, perhaps prophets, maybe even small groups, will go to Jerusalem and prophesy for 1260 days. We believe we are already beginning to see the stage set for this as these two lands especially are lost tribes areas as is Central Africa.

Two Witnesses of Revelation Explained. This Will Rock Your World. Ophir, Sheba, Tarshish

When do you think this final generation will arrive? Is it our generation or is there still more time?

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

Let's go back to your comment about "restoring the law." Is it not true Jesus Christ came to free us from the law by fulfilling it?  

30:18  He came to fulfill the covenant which is certainly for us indeed. This was His purpose but has He done this yet? Didn't He do that on the cross already and in His resurrection? Well let's see what He says about that. 
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law," that's the law of Moses, "or the prophets," that's the Old Testament, the writings of the prophets. "I am not come to destroy," destroy what? The law of Moses nor the Old Testament.  "But to fulfill," fulfill what? The law of Moses and the prophecies of the prophets, the Old Testament. And then He tells when all will be fulfilled and he does not use His resurrection as the timestamp at all.  "For verily I say unto you till heaven and earth pass one jot or one tittle," Hebrew letters basically, "shall in nowise pass from the law till all be fulfilled."   
Now when does heaven and earth pass away? When all is fulfilled. Did it pass away at His resurrection. No. It's still there. Revelation 21 says that heaven and earth pass away at the time of the final judgment basically. Look around. Has earth passed away yet? If someone tells you it ever did they don't know scripture because the first heaven and earth are still here.  
And the second one does not take place until that time of the end according to scripture essentially at the final judgement. But also this passage tells us when the law is fulfilled. All is fulfilled when? When heaven and earth pass away.  Why, by the way?  Because heaven and earth are the witnesses to the law in scripture. Keep reading though. 
"Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments and shall teach men so he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven." Why would He say this knowing He was about to go to the cross if He were about to fulfill the law?

Lost Tribes Series: Part 4A: Grafted Into the Kingdom

So, you are saying Christ did not fulfill the law? Did he not say it is finished while on the cross?

33:12 There's only one day of judgment and that's when all souls are judged. All of them. Billions. Uh, Messiah's greatest work is to come. Uh, the cross was wonderful and very significant no doubt but he did not complete his work on the cross and no scripture actually says he does. That comes out of our pulpits but actually his greatest works are to come.

Unlocking Hidden Truths with The God Culture - Zen Garcia & Tim Schwab

So, you are saying Christ did not fulfill the law or complete His work, and we must still keep the law?  Is that right?

20:05 For us to not keep his law, uh-oh here it comes, is also to not love Him. As if we love Him what do we do? John 15, keep my commandments. Even in revelation what are they found doing at the very end the end times remnant? Keeping His commandments, His law.  Do we love him? This is a covenant folks and it is  the way it works. See that's they way he defines this. It's a covenant relationship. This is intimacy wth the Creator.  He loves you that much. He wants to be intimate with you in relationship. Are we in relationship with Him or not?
Sabbath Series: Part 3B. Messiah Kept the Sabbath.

18:52 Relationship with Him is the requirement of salvation and for getting our prayers answered.

You are equating and reducing our relationship with God to keeping the law. What about righteousness by faith apart from the law? Romans 3:21-22 says, "But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe."

19:30 So this is another example that we aren't to just have faith in Yahusha. That’s not enough. That’s not it.  No, no, no, no. We are to keep His commandments.
Sabbath Series: Part 5: The End Times Sabbath
40:11 The law is what redeems us.

The law is what redeems us? But in Galatians 3:13 Paul says, "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law." Paul also tells us Abraham was not justified by keeping the law but by his faith. Romans 4:3 says "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." That means he was righteous apart from the law.

16:44 Abraham kept the law and the sabbath. And so did Isaac and Jacob.  I mean how can they be called righteous if there was no law by which they could be judged as righteous? The very notion is ridiculous from the start.

Sabbath Series: Introduction Commentary Only

It seems that you are saying a man is not saved by faith but by keeping the law. 

11:39 Abiding is doing something, by the way. It's not sitting back and doing nothing. Abiding is something that you physically have to do in relationship with Him which is never defined in all of scripture as saying a shallow prayer and checking a box on a decision card. 

If abiding in Christ is dependent upon our works and not the faithfulness of Jesus Christ who promised in John 10 I will give you eternal life and no man can pluck you out of my hand how can we ever have any assurance of  our salvation? 

27:46 People ask at times how do we know we are saved? Well, are you keeping the sabbath? That is the sign of one who is saved and in relationship with Him. Sorry, we tell the truth here. 

So, keeping the Sabbath indicates we are saved?

22:35 One person commented drawing the conclusion that we teach sabbath is salvation and that, we want to call out right now, is absolutely ridiculous. Wrong. We never said that. We said knowing Him in a true relationship is and always has been, even in the Old Testament, salvation.

Sabbath Series: Part 3B. Messiah Kept the Sabbath.

A moment ago you said keeping the sabbath is "the sign of one who is saved."  But now you are saying the opposite and that keeping the sabbath is not indicative of salvation. How do you reconcile this contradiction? Can a person lose their salvation if they do not keep the sabbath and the rest of the Mosaic law?

59:10  For if God spared not the natural branches, the Israelites, take heed lest he also spare not thee. Wait I thought you couldn't lose your salvation. Hmmm.

Lost Tribes Series: Part 4A: Grafted Into the Kingdom

8:20 There is no such thing as "once saved always saved" because you said a prayer. Forget it, it's not Scripture. Salvation is always in Scripture according to Paul, especially, a lifestyle. Again read Matthew 7, read John 15 the whole chapters and you will find Messiah defines salvation not Paul and Paul agrees with his definition and he has to. Most especially to Paul who just said so in this passage multiple times as he tells us that we should do good works, that we should walk, that we should have relationship. We're talking about action words here, we're talking about us having to do something. He's also saying to keep the law. That's doing something.   

Colossians 2. What Did Paul Say? Not What We Are Told.

Where does Jesus Christ fit in all of this? What need do we have of Him if our salvation depends on keeping the law? Isn't Jesus Christ the core of the entire Bible? 

45:00  The Sabbath and the feasts are the core of the biblical calendar and of the entire bible.

Sabbath Series: Part 2A. Origin of the Sabbath. Not Moses!

10:39 Again, is there salvation through the law? No. One is not saved by keeping the law.  That is Pharisee doctrine, not what Paul says. Paul is clear there is only salvation through Yahushah Hamashiach. 
It may sound confusing but it's actually very simple. It has become confusing because Pharisees have gotten their hands in it and mixed it up.  We receive Him in making a decision to make Him our Lord. I mean a real decision not just saying a prayer and in fact a prayer is not even required. However we are saved if we continue in that relationship and this where the law comes in because if you claim Messiah is your lord you cannot serve the law of sin and death any longer. If you serve the law of sin and death He is not your Lord. Sorry but He's not. He can't be. You cannot serve two masters, right? He said that. And there is no reconciling the two opposite laws as somehow the same. 
Colossians 3. What Did Paul Say? Not What We Are Told.

Tim, you say that we are not saved by keeping the law but earlier you said that our relationship to God is defined by keeping the law which is the same thing as saying we are saved by keeping the law. You even said the law is what redeems us. Do you not see this as a contradiction? Isn't it true that while you are saying we must keep the law you are living in open sin by being  married to a twice divorced woman which is something Jesus condemned when he said "whosoever shall marry her that is divorced commiteth adultery?" How do you reconcile the contradiction between your doctrine of salvation by keeping the law and your living in open adultery?

35:46 Just so you know I am divorced and remarried myself. At the time I was ministering, leading worship and helps ministry, at a mega church in Florida in which that group of pastors assessed my situation and shows it was lawful and they married my Filipino wife and I in their Chapel with her full endorsement, many of those pastors even in attendance but their full support. We continue to be vetted and by many since and this woman is the largest blessing of my life. This is a blogger somehow who employ such distasteful, disgusting and demonic, poets who actually said my wife, my wonderful wife, should be put away.

How dare he. He better hope I am able to follow the commandments if I ever meet him, that's for sure.

Sabbath Series: Part 3D: Sermon On The Mount: Did Messiah Abolish the Law?

Let's move on to another topic. Do you believe in the Trinity? That God is three persons, the Father, Son, and Spirit, in one divine nature? 

1:00:44 Then espousing some doctrine of men like Trinity which is a word that never even appears in scripture once. That's why you don't see any videos from us on that. We could care less about the doctrines of men. 

Sabbath Series: Part 3C. Did Messiah Break the Sabbath?
Yes, the word Trinity is not in the Bible but certainly the concept is right? 

36:22 Moses wrote Genesis and he wrote Elohim in the beginning because the Elohim he refers to is two, the Father and the Son. 

Restoring Creation: Part 2: Continued... Did Moses Write the First Chapters of Genesis?

What about the Holy Spirit? Isn't He also God?

1:27:47 Yahusha said Moses wrote of me. Hello? He did so in Genesis and Jubilees first and actually if we went back even further uh, when it says "In the beginning Elohim said", right, Elohim created the heavens and the earth, well, that word Elohim is there, not God, by the way. It's Elohim in Hebrew and it's plural. It's two. It's the Father and the Son. Some throw in the Holy Spirit uh, we can't find any Scriptures where the Holy Spirit is a creator, but whatever. 

Restoring Creation: Part 3: What Is the Origin of Genesis? Not Sumer or the Occult!

You say that the Holy Spirit is not God but everything He does, everything attributed to Him, indicates he is God. In Ephesians 2:22 Paul says we "are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit." Surely that would mean the Spirit of God is divine? 

13:08 There's no mention in Jubilees of the Holy Spirit specifically. Uh, Moses doesn't separate him out there, uh, and that may be telling, uh, but we're, we're not sure on that though we'll keep researching. Uh, he mentions all the spirits that serve before Him, uh, which are indisputably angels. Uh, whether the Holy Spirit is included in that we don't know. Uh, that's a topic for another series requiring a lot of research we're not going to touch yet but we will eventually. We'd like to get to that, anyway. We know He was there though and that the Angels weren't yet, uh, at that point on Genesis 1:2. Uh, so if if He was created per se He would have been created before, uh, the Angels not at the same time and certainly not lumped in with them. So, not sure that, that that's the case and He very well may be. Uh, yes he's the Eternal Holy Spirit but Eternal, uh, the angels are Eternal, man is eternal so that doesn't mean that He existed prior to being created if he was a creation like other Spirits. There's just no mention of Him as existing prior and the word Eternal does not denote no beginning, again. So, there's no scripture that really says, okay, and that may actually tell us much.

Restoring Creation: Part 13: Where Did the Water and Deep Come From? Gen. 1:2 Understood in Job 26

You heard it here folks. The Holy Spirit, the very spirit of God who dwells within us and seals our redemption, is a creation.

Tim, tell us what future projects you are working on.

2:30:58 But we're working on a textbook. A real textbook. A four year course that will teach, especially Filipinos but people all over the world, the foundation of the Bible which includes the Philippines. Because it includes the Garden of Eden which is here. You don't get a more significant land than that of the Garden of Eden, the very land of creation itself. So, we're working on that project right now and we hope to get that out in time. 

https://www.facebook.com/sabbathbc.congregation/videos/848713996196488

A real textbook? Does that mean your books and videos will be taught in the classroom?

1:01:35 Of course we we understand there's a lot of professors out there whose jobs are at stake if they took a stand for this. But do you know there are some that are teaching this in classrooms? I won't expose them but there's one who asked us for Solomon's Treasure and we sent them copies for their classrooms. There's another one that's using the videos and they're actually showing Solomon's Gold Series in the college classroom.

Is Philippines Ophir? Recent News. Live in Davao. Message to Congress.

Thanks for taking the time to talk with us Tim. I am sure the audience has learned quite a lot from what you have to say about the Philippines and the Bible.

1:41:40 I want to thank you for having us on. 

And there you have it folks. That was Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture. A man who believes Filipinos will fight the anti-christ, faith in Christ is not enough to save a person, one can lose their salvation, and the Holy Spirit, the very spirit of God himself who dwells within all believers, is a creature. Is that what you believe too? Good night everybody and see you next time. 

Sunday, December 31, 2023

The God Culture: Jesus Did not Finish His Work on the Cross

In an interview with Zen Garcia Timothy Jay Schwab, also known as The God Culture had a stunning revelation. Tim says Jesus did not finish His work on the cross.

Unlocking Hidden Truths with The God Culture - Zen Garcia & Tim Schwab

33:12 There's only one day of judgment and that's when all souls are judged. All of them. Billions. Uh, Messiah's greatest work is to come. Uh, the cross was wonderful and very significant no doubt but he did not complete his work on the cross and no scripture actually says he does. That comes out of our pulpits but actually his greatest works are to come.

What a lot of nonsense. Listen to how he snidely praises the cross by saying oh it was "wonderful and very significant no doubt" but then goes on to belittle Jesus' sacrifice by saying "he did not complete his work on the cross" and "his greatest works are to come." What greater work can there be than Jesus' sacrifice for us which defeated sin, death, and the devil and sealed our salvation and redemption for eternity? 

It is simply a lie that no scripture says His work is finished. Jesus himself said IT IS FINISHED.

John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost

God incarnated as a man, kept and fulfilled the law, and defeated sin, hell, death, and the devil by dying on the cross. There is nothing more for him to do. He is sitting on the right hand of the Father this moment because everything has been fulfilled. To say the last judgement has not come therefore "he did not complete his work on the cross" is unbiblical and blasphemous. Take it from the mouth of Jesus Christ Himself. 

Wednesday, November 22, 2023

The God Culture: 100 Lies About the Philippines: #14 Tome Pires Equates the Lequios and Lucoes

Welcome back to 100 lies the God Culture teaches about the Philippines. Today's lie once again concerns the identification of the Lequios and Lucoes. Last time we looked at Timothy Jay Schwab's misunderstanding of Pigafetta's journal.  Today we will look at his ignorance of Tome Pires' Summa Oriental.

 

Even though Tim does use Tome Pires as a source he does not have much to say about what he writes. 

The Lequios of Luzon: Key to Finding Ophir and Chryse. Clue #52

18:31 Tome Pires writes The Leqouis bring swords worth thirty cruzados each  and many of these. Many. Cool. It appears a cruzado is equal to that of a Spanish ducat. 30 ducats in today's value in gold would be about 4,500 US dollars. This is a serious sword and a serious amount of money and they had many of them? Wow. One must wonder if maybe these swords are gold plated perhaps like the daggers of the Ophirians.


The Lequios of Luzon: Key to Finding Ophir and Chryse. Clue #52

19:35 The island of Japan according to what all the Chinese say is larger than that of the LUCOES. Japan's largest island by the way, Honshu, is more  than twice as large as Luzon the largest island in the Philippines so that does fit. They do not often  trade in China because it is far off and they have no junks. What? They have no junks. Doesn't mean they don't have ships but they don't have junk ships but that's a key because junk ships are associated with the LUCOES  often in these quotes in court even Pigafetta as we shared  already. Nor are they seafaring men. See Lequois have junks and they are seafaring men. Japan is not. The Leqouis, LUCOES, go to Japan in seven or eight days and take the said merchandise and trade it  for copper, gold and copper. Now, again, two resources that fit the Philippines and also the trip in days also fits the trip from the Philippines. So very reasonable that all of this comes together and this just affirms everything else we've covered.

When Tim is reading from Tome Pires several times he says Lucoes instead of Lequios. He is reading his own interpretation into the text. In his book Solomon's Treasure Tim only cites Pires twice. 

The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pg. 162

In fact, Japan is recorded as having “no junks” and are not Lequios according to Tome Pires [166]


The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pg. 165-166

This word Lequios or Lucoes became a general term used by many for Luzon Island thus, not a mystery to history in the slightest but only to the British it appears as Portugal, France and India certainly knew.

“Called Philippines “Lucoes” from its largest and north western-most island–Luzon.” – Pyrard De Laval, French (1578-1623) [166] Indians referred to the biggest island as “Lucon.” [166]
In 1545, a Portuguese, Pero Fidalgo referred to Philippines as “Lucoes” [166] –Tome Pires

It's not true that Lequios became a general term for Luzon Island. As I have established in the article about Ferdinand Pinto the Lequios islands were known and charted at 29 North. The problem is Tim continues to conflate the two words and people groups Lequios and Lucoes. These two citations are the only references to Tome Pires in Tim's book. Here is the exact source he uses.

That is unbelievable. Tim cites from page 131 about Japan and from the footnotes on pages 133-134. Why didn't he cite anything from the chapters on the Lequios and the Lucoes?  Tome Pires has two chapters devoted to each group!

Did Tim flip through this book and miss those chapters or did he decide to not mention them because they destroy his case for the Lequios and Lucoes being the same people group? Here are the two brief chapters in full.

The Lequeos are called Guores-they are known by either of these names. Lequios is the chief one. The king is a heathen and all the people too. He is a tributary vassal of the king of the Chinese. His island is large and has many people; they have small ships of their own type; they have three or four junks which are continuously buying in China, and they have no more. They trade in China and Malacca, and sometimes in company with the Chinese, sometimes on their own. In China they trade in the port of Foqem which is in the land of China near Canton—a day and a night's sail away. The Malays say to the people of Malacca that there is no difference between Portuguese and Llequjos, except that the Portuguese buy women, which the Lequos do not. 

The Lequjos have only wheat in their country, and rice and wines after their fashion, meat, and fish in great abundance. They are great draftsmen and armourers. They make gilt coffers, very rich and well-made fans, swords, many arms of all kinds after their fashion. Just as we in our kingdoms speak of Milan, so do the Chinese and all the other races speak of the Lequjos. They are very truthful men. They do not buy slaves, nor would they sell one of their own men for the whole world, and they would die over this. 

The Lequjos are idolators; if they are sailing and find themselves in danger, they say that if they escape they buy a beautiful maiden to be sacrificed and behead her on the prow of the junk, and other things like these. They are white men, well dressed, better than the Chinese, more dignified. They sail to China and take the merchandise that goes from Malacca to China, and go to Japan, which is an island seven or eight days' sail distant, and take the gold and copper in the said island in exchange for their merchandise. The Leqios are men who sell their merchandise freely for credit, and if they are lied to when they collect payment, they collect it sword in hand.

The chief is gold, copper, and arms of all kinds, coffers, boxes (caxonjas) with gold leaf veneer, fans, wheat, and their things are well made. They bring a great deal of gold. They are truthful men—more so than the Chinese—and feared. They bring a great store of paper and silk in colours; they bring musk, porce-lain, damask; they bring onions and many vegetables. They take the same merchandise as the Chinese take. They leave here in [blank], and one, two or three junks come to Malacca every year, and they take a great deal of Bengal clothing. 

Among the Lequjos Malacca wine is greatly esteemed. They load large quantities of one kind which is like brandy, with which the Malays make themselves [so drunk as to run] amuck. The Lequjos bring swords worth thirty cruzados each, and many of these. 

Pires, pg, 128-131

That is everything Pires has to say about the Lequios. Was Luzon ever a tributary of China? Was there one king of the Ilocanos? Of course not. Here is what Pires has to say about the Lucoes.

The Lucoes are about ten days' sail beyond Borneo. They are nearly all heathen; they have no king, but they are ruled by groups of elders. They are a robust people, little thought of in Malacca. They have two or three junks, at the most. They take the merchandise to Borneo and from there they come to Malacca.

The Borneans go to the lands of the Lucoes to buy gold, and foodstuffs as well, and the gold which they bring to Malacca is from the Lucoes and from the surrounding islands which are countless; and they all have more or less trade with one another. And the gold of these islands where they trade is of a low quality —indeed very low quality. 

The Lucoes have in their country plenty of foodstuffs, and wax and honey; and they take the same merchandise from here as the Borneans take. They are almost one people; and in Malacca there is no division between them. They never used to be in Malacca as they are now; but the Tamaqua whom the Governor of India appointed here was already beginning to gather many of them together, and they were already building many houses and shops. They are a useful people; they are hard-working. 

Of this family there are now the sons of the Tumunguo and his wife in Malacca, as well as his mother-in-law, and Curia Raja and Tuam Brajy who married the Tumunguo's wife. In Minjam there must be five hundred Lucoes, some of them important men and good merchants, who want to come to Malacca, and the people of Mjjm will not grant them permission, because now they have gone over to the side of the former king of Malacca, not very openly. The people of Mjmjam are Malays.
Pires, pg. 133-134

The Lucoes do not have a king while the Lequios do. They also have gold of a very low quality. They also only have two or three junks. How much more clearer could it be that Pires differentiates these peoples? They are not the same. If Tim had bothered to do any research and actually read the Summa Oriental of Tome Pires he would know that. Instead he has used another lie to build his monumental case for the Philippines no one can disprove. 

Wednesday, November 15, 2023

The God Culture: 100 Lies About the Philippines: #13 Pigafetta Says the Lequios Are From Luzon

Welcome back to 100 lies the God Culture teaches about the Philippines. Today's lie concerns the identification of the Lequios and Lucoes. Because this lie is so intricately weaved I will be breaking it down into several smaller articles. The gist of it is that Timothy Jay Schwab identifies the Lequios and Lucoes people groups as being the same. They are Filipinos from Luzon.

As I showed in lie #2 Ferdinand Pinto visited the Lequios islands and charted them at 29 degrees north. That means the Lequios islands are not the Philippines but the Ryukyu Islands. However Tim teaches something completely different which needs to be broken down. The first aspect of this lie comes from Tim's total misunderstanding of Pigafetta's Journal. 

The Lequios of Luzon: Key to Finding Ophir and Chryse. Clue #52

13:31 While in Visayas Antonio Pigafetta who traveled with Magellan, historian who chronicled everything, writes from Visayas: Towards the Northwest is the island of Luzon which is at two days distance a large island indeed. To which come to trade every year six or eight junks of the people called Lequii, Lequios, Lucoes same people it's there Pigafetta says they are in Luzon. Not in Taiwan not in Malaysia and Magellan says they are Ophir and Tarshish. Done.

15:19 So, the Lequios are from Luzon. This is settled. Magellan tells us they are Ophir and Tarshish.

Can Tim not read? At no point does Pigafetta say the Lequii or Lequios are FROM Luzon. He says they come to Luzon to trade. 

Tim gets this even more wrong in his book The Search for King Solomon's Treasure. 

However, Antonio Pigafetta tells us where the Lequios originated.

[From Visayas] “Towards the North-west is the island of Lozonwhich is at two days’ distance; a large island, to which come to trade every year six or eight junks of the people called Lequii.” “...One of these junks carries as much cargo as our ships.” – Antonio Pigafetta, 1521

This clearly reads that the Lequios, who originate in Luzon, journey to Cebu regularly to trade in their six or more, large junk ships just as Pinto describes.

Solomon's Treasure, pgs. 162-163

This is totally wrong. Read carefully. He says Luzon is a large island TO WHICH the people called Lequii came to trade. He is not saying the Lequii came to Cebu from Luzon to trade. Pigafetta is not even writing from Cebu but from Butuan fifty leagues from Cebu!! He is saying that Northwest of Butuan is an island called Luzon and the Lequii came there every year to trade. Therefore the Lequii are not the Lucoes who actually do inhabit Luzon. How does Tim get this wrong except on purpose?

This is one lie among many concerning the Lequios people that Tim propounds. It is a totally false reading of Pigafetta. How did he get this wrong? Can he not read? It's not a complicated passage. 

Wednesday, November 8, 2023

The God Culture: 100 Lies About the Philippines: #12 Lapulapu Rejected Colonialism

Welcome back to 100 lies The God Culture teaches about the Philippines. Today's lie concerns Timothy Jay Schwab's assertion that LapuLapu killed Magellan as a defiant act rejecting colonialism.

This lie is a direct result of Tim's unfamiliarity with all of the primary sources regarding Magellan's voyage around the world except for Pigafetta's journal. 


https://youtu.be/130c3XUuPEs

Today is a very special day for the world. It marks the five hundredth anniversary of one of the greatest stories in the fight to stop foreign invaders from coming in and taking over our lands. Yes, the story of a man and his followers who indeed stopped the invasion, killing their leader Magellan. Then in a separate encounter killing his replacement and brother-in-law and other leaders and then they chased them out of the country with a fleet of ships. That’s what Pigafetta’s journal says, and we cover. This is an inspiration to the whole world who was being conquered by colonialism yet this man and his people put up a standard and stopped them the story of Lapu-Lapu five hundred years ago today. Wow.

Is any of that true? It's rather disgusting that Tim takes a perverse joy in the death of Magellan. What exactly does Pigafetta say? Well, you see that is the problem. Timothy relies ONLY on the account of Pigafetta. In the description of this video Tim writes:


Do you know the full story of Lapu Lapu? Have you read Antonio Pigafetta's Journal which is the only actual historic account? There are many narratives based on even rumor but the facts are clear. 

What narratives based on rumor is he talking about? In all of his videos and in his book The Search for King Solomon's Treasure Tim never mentions these narratives. Well, the fact is there are other narratives about Magellan's voyage around the world and they are not based on rumor but on the sworn testimony of the surviving crew members. They add details Pigafetta omits such as about the mutiny. He also never tells us exactly why Lapulapu got angry with Magellan.


Fernando Bustamante, the ship's barber-surgeon gave this testimony when he arrived back in Spain:

12. He said: that they killed the said Magellan in a port that they say Matan, because those of the kingdom of Matan wanted to obey the king of Castile, and the said Ferdinand of Magellan said that they had to kiss the hand of the king of Zubú, and they did not they wanted to kiss the hand of the said king of Zubu; And about this the said Magellan went there, and they killed the said captain and seven other men, and wounded other people.

Navarette Colección pg. 294-295

Peter Martyr D' Anghera interviewed the crew on their return and wrote the following in book five of De Orbe Novo:


Leaving the ships at Zubo, Magellan crossed to the island of Matam, visible on the horizon at a distance of only four leagues. He used the shallops and the native boats dug out of tree trunks. His intention was to persuade the ruler of Matam, through his interpreters, to make his submission to the great King of Spain, and to the chief of Zubo; and to pay tribute to the former. The king answered that he was willing to obey the King of Spain, but not the chieftain of Zubo. Thereupon Magellan ordered a fortress composed of about fifty houses, near the royal residence, to be sacked and burnt. He afterwards returned to Zubo, bringing his booty, some foodstuffs which were needed there, as well as several pieces of furniture; but the inhabitants of Zubo, who were hostile to the islanders of Matam, stole the greater part from him.

The king of Matan was Lapulpau and he was not the only king who said he would give obedience to the King of Spain but did not wish to bow the knee to Humabon the King of Cebu. Juan Sebastian Elcano testified that the King of Bohol was also willing to obey the King of Spain but not Humabon.

Said Magellan went from the island of Zubu to the island of Bohol, and to the island of Matan, and invited the batels to make war with all the people so that those of the other islands would obey the King of Zubu; and they said that they would obey the King our Lord, and they would give him parias; but that they were not to obey the King of Zubu, because they were as good as him; I know that they would give gold jewels for the King our Lord.

Navarette Colección pg. 288

The following comes from Dr. Danilo Gerona who wrote a book titled, "Ferdinand Magellan, The Armada de Maluco and the European Discovery of the Philippines." This history is based on years of research and reading primary source documents tucked away in Spain before they became available online. Here is what he writes concerning this testimony.

While Magellan seemed to have used Humabon as a political ally to establish his base in Cebu as a springboard for establishing Spanish hegemony, Humabon, on the other hand had also used Magellan to coerce others to submission to his authority. As Pigafetta recalled Humabon was said to have asked Magellan: “but that if the captain would send him the following night one boat full of men to give him assistance, he would fight and subdue his rival. On the receipt of this message, the captain decided to go himself with three boats.” 

Do you see how this story is not so cut and dry? According to these three men the rest of the story is that Humabon, the King of Cebu, was using Magellan to manipulate others to be placed under his authority. He was playing political chess like those in power still do today. But Lapulapu wasn't having it. He was willing to give obedience to the Spanish Crown but not to Humabon who was his enemy. It's absolutely pathetic that this history is unknown to Timothy Jay Schwab because he relies solely on Pigafetta and calls all other eyewitness testimony rumor. It is also a testament to the fact that he is no real researcher and there is no God Culture Team.

Monday, October 23, 2023

The God Culture: Apocrypha Scrolls Found In Qumran And Those Not Present, Vol. 2

Timothy Jay Schwab, also known as The God Culture, has finally released volume 2 of his testing of the Apocrypha. You can read my review of volume one at this link.

Apocrypha Scrolls Found In Qumran And Those Not Present, Vol. 2

As I noted in my review of volume one there has been so much ink spilled about these books that Tim's contributions are absolutely not needed and they are in no way helpful. I am not interested in rebutting or affirming the canonicity of these texts but in showcasing Tim's awful methodology. 

The fact is the Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox consider the Apocryphal books to be canonical scripture. For some reason Tim is under the impression that the exclusion of these books from Protestant Bibles is a conspiracy to hide the truth. That is simply not the case as prior to the 19th century all Protestant Bibles contained these books. The reason they were removed was purely a cost saving measure by Bible translation societies. 

In 1826, the National Bible Society of Scotland petitioned the British and Foreign Bible Society not to print the Apocrypha, resulting in a decision that no BFBS funds were to pay for printing any Apocryphal books anywhere. They reasoned that by not printing the secondary material of Apocrypha within the Bible, the scriptures would prove to be less costly to produce. The precise form of the resolution was:

That the funds of the Society be applied to the printing and circulation of the Canonical Books of Scripture, to the exclusion of those Books and parts of Books usually termed Apocryphal.

Similarly, in 1827, the American Bible Society determined that no bibles issued from their depository should contain the Apocrypha.

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

This removal then became the standard for all Protestant Bibles. Yet Tim writes:

Though Wisdom of Solomon direct fragments are not found in Qumran, it is clear the community read and used it as inspired. When our modern Canon is not following this firmly established precedent, one must wonder what the agenda of modern scholars may be. 

pg. 37

Is this guy so stupid as to not realize that scholars do not, have not, and never will determine the Biblical Canon? Is he also so stupid as to not realize anyone can buy a Bible with these books in it? Take note that Tim admits no fragments of the Wisdom of Solomon were found in Qumran. Of course he cites a few scholars to help him prove otherwise which is rather hypocritical of him. 

Now, keep in mind that Tim's guiding principle as to what is and is not scripture is "Was it found at Qumran?" The Wisdom of Solomon was not found at Qumran but that does not stop Tim from rejecting it because a few passages from the Dead Sea Scrolls appear to cite it. Tim then proceeds to prove Wisdom was quoted in the New Testament and says something rather interesting:

This is extremely compelling that the Wisdom of Solomon was quoted in the New Testament and most importantly, whether attributed to that book or not, the doctrine is there. 

pg. 41

So, something can be in the Bible without being directly spelled out? Did Tim forget that he denies the Trinity because the word is not the Bible? The concept certainly is though. 

The History of Susana was also not found at Qumran but again that is not stopping Tim from declaring it was because of a tiny fragment that appears to have "a few points of contact."

In our view, a "few points of contact" to Susanna's one chapter in fragments this small is solid in being able to affirm it found there. Fragments are all we have of most of the scripture found there and they had no problem trying to stretch the Proto-Esther Fragments belonging to 1st Esdras over to Esther in fraud.

pg. 52

In "vetting" Susana Tim claims one scholar, J.T. Milik, actually thought the book was found at Qumran but changed his mind due to "pressure."

Initially. J.T. Milik suggested this fragment as belonging to the story of Susanna. He changed his view in the end but likely due to pressure. 

pg. 53

In fact many scholars are covering-up the truth due to "pressure."

Basically, the math is simple. Out of 10 criteria, Susanna passes on 8 of 10 with an 80 percent score. The two criteria in which it doesn't agree, also do not correspond to Judges. However, Judges 19 fails miserably with a 50 percent score fitting 5 of 10 criteria. What kind of scholar cannot conduct such a simple test to decide? The kind that does not wish to perhaps due to pressure. This is gross negligence. This Qumran fragment squares to Susanna in content as Susanna was found there. 

pg. 58

Of course Tim does not tell us who is pressuring these scholars or why they are doing it. It's simply ad hoc nonsense because Tim thinks he is right and everyone is wrong. 

Both Bel and the Dragon and The Prayer of Azaryah were also not found in Qumran.

In light of the ancient association of Daniel and its addendum of Susanna, which was found in Qumran, it is more than reasonable to connect both Bel & The Dragon as well as Prayer of Azaryah as all three small books were once considered part of, and attached to, the Book of Daniel. 

Though no direct Qumran fragments exist for this one chapter, the association is firm as demonstrated by the Greek Septuagint (LXX)from the B.C. era, Theodotion's Greek Version 1811, and the Egyptian find of Papyrus 967 especially (McLay [108]). Bel & The Dragon was also found in manuscript form in Cod. Ambmsianus (MS) [oaf. Cyprian (257) quoted Danie114:5 which is Bel & The Dragon published as the Book of Daniel [84]1811. Origen  defended it as canon. Pope Damasus I (305384) included Daniel as “one book" incorporating Susanna, Bel & The Dragon, and Prayer of Azaryah. The tradition is well established. It does not matter that there may be some publishing from the ancient era which separated these books. What matters is that they were together in some form published within Daniel. 

pg. 63 

Just as with Bel & The Dragon, even without fragments in Qumran, we find the association strong enough that Daniel did include these addendums as his practice. When one reviews this powerful prayer, it certainly rings true in content as well. There is nothing to be afraid in perusing this small book. At the end of the full publishing of this book, we will vet the plausibility of the details. 

pg. 68
Tim's proof that these texts were used at Qumran is because anciently they were all part of the Book of Daniel. 

Sorry not sorry but that is not enough. Let me restate Tim's criterion for Biblical Canonicity once more:

The first and sole true judge of historicity is whether or not a text was found affirmed in the Dead Sea Scrolls where the Temple Priests were who kept the only official Bible Canon to the First Century. 

Apocrypha Scrolls Found In Qumran And Those Not Present, Vol. 1, pg. 68

Also known as the "Book of Wisdom" or simply as "Wisdom" in some translations and quotes, direct fragments of the Wisdom of Solomon were not found present in Qumran. However, it was used by the author °floral community documents such as 4QInstruction. It appears this book was included in the original Greek Septuagint which dates in origin to the 300-200 B.C. era. Unfortunately, many scoffers would claim we do not know if Wisdom of Solomon was originally there even though it carried through tradition for thousands of years. However, with the connection to Qumran, there is no debate on that point. It was certainly perceived and used as inspired scripture in that time and more importantly than Egyptian translators or the Pharisees such as Josephus, by the actual Qumran/Bethabara exiled Temple Priests. They are the final word on the Old Testament Canon from the time of Moses and really Jacob to the First Century. 

Apocrypha Scrolls Found In Qumran And Those Not Present, Vol. 2, pg. 31

Old Testament Canon from the time of Jacob? But there is no scripture until the time of Moses. This undoubtedly means that Tim believes the Testaments of the 12 Patriarchs are scripture.

https://youtu.be/sWflamM2Bu4?si=OBx-g5VsylRPBw0f

These three additions to Daniel as well as the Book of Wisdom were not found amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls in Qumran. Therefore, according to Tim's criteria, they are not part of the Old Testament canon. End of story. 

Needless to say there is a lot of nonsense in this book. In an attempt to defend the historicity of Bel and the Dragon Timothy Jay Schwab has an entire section devoted to proving dragons existed.

pg. 193

Were dragons real? Who cares! That's NOT what Bel and the Dragon is about! Did he even bother to read this book? And it goes on for 10 pages!

pg. 197

The Incredible Hulk shows up on page 173 as Tim attempts to prove that the demon Asmodeus from the Book of Tobit was actually a demon possessed Nephilim giant. 

pg. 173

Actually this image is titled "3D Illustration Giant Monster" and you can buy it for $9.98 at Shutterstock. But if you search this image on Google you get the Incredible Hulk because it's clearly a rip-off.

Probably the most important section in this book is Tim's attempted dismissal of Maccabees as falsified history. This section is 40 pages long and is a very convoluted interpretation of history that barely cites from Maccabees except in derision. Let's take a look at a few things he says.

By 165 B.C., Greece was distracted and otherwise engaged as they were in decline. Multiple battles with Rome for over live decades were taking a toll. Greek resources were shifted back to Greece to fight the Romans and it makes no sense for a Greek ruler to begin to act as a dictator. The entire narrative of Antiochus IV Epiphanes needing to enter the Temple to sacrifice a pig instigating another front of war with Judaea would not just be incredibly stupid timing, it never happened, It was the Samaritans who sensed the absence of Greek power and in that vacuum, they seized the opportunity to assault and capture the Temple never returning it to the Levites. They claim to be Levites yet all the sons of Zadok were in the Temple at that time managing worship and none lived in Samaria from where the Maccabees originated. The problem for Maccabees is they came from a foreign country, not Judaea. No sons of Zadok were there in Modrin, and they were not Levites. They were foreign invaders conquering the Temple which they had desired for many centuries. 

pg. 257

Ah yes, it was the Samaritans who assaulted Jerusalem and took over the Temple. Where is this history recorded in the New Testament or anywhere else? It isn't. It's not there. At no time when Jesus encounters the Samaritans does he mention such a history and when he condemns the priests he never calls them fake Samaritans. 

Tim goes on to interpret Daniel 8:9.

And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

He interprets it this way:

This passage also identifies that this Little Horn rises from inside of the same horn in which Jerusalem is located. Thus, this is not a mystery in the slightest. Jerusalem is in Ptolemy and this enemy, which is not Greece though part of its conquest, are just to the Northwest of Jerusalem which must still be Ptolemy. They cannot be the Seleucids who are already an identified horn and this one is new rising out of Ptolemy which narrows this down. The area there falls outside of Judaea in Samaria but Southern Samaria at this time was still part of Ptolemy's region still. The locals still observed the separation of Judaea from Samaria but Greece and even Rome later, never really did. The Seleucid area begins just North of that which would no longer be Ptolemy and cannot conform to Daniel's prophecy. It is a complete lie that Antiochus IV Epiphanes, a Seleucid, defiled the Temple according to Daniel. 

This most be a power within Ptolemy, smaller than all of Ptolemy, that rises, thus was not risen as a power yet in those days. It cannot be a full horn of four, but a Little Horn rising as a portion of one of the four, and it attacks Ptolemy's portion of Jerusalem including the Temple especially. This means Daniel defines Josephus and Maccabees as a false history as both fail to even understand the geography of those days. The Seleucid Antiochus IV Epiphanes was not from Ptolemy, is not a new power, and cannot rise out of Ptolemy when the horn of his authority was already in power since Alexander's death, and not new. That traditional interpretation has always been harebrained and uneducated. The Dead Sea Scrolls fully reveal this.

pg. 259-256 

This is 100% wrong. The Little Horn is not Samaria. It is Antiochus who warred against Egypt (the south),  the East (Persia), and Israel (the pleasant land.) Samaria did not attack Egypt. Antiochus IV did and that is exactly what Maccabees tells us. 
1 Maccabees 1:16 Now when the kingdom was established before Antiochus, he thought to reign over Egypt that he might have the dominion of two realms.

17 Wherefore he entered into Egypt with a great multitude, with chariots, and elephants, and horsemen, and a great navy,

18 And made war against Ptolemee king of Egypt: but Ptolemee was afraid of him, and fled; and many were wounded to death.

19 Thus they got the strong cities in the land of Egypt and he took the spoils thereof.

20 And after that Antiochus had smitten Egypt, he returned again in the hundred forty and third year, and went up against Israel and Jerusalem with a great multitude,

21 And entered proudly into the sanctuary, and took away the golden altar, and the candlestick of light, and all the vessels thereof,

22 And the table of the shewbread, and the pouring vessels, and the vials. and the censers of gold, and the veil, and the crown, and the golden ornaments that were before the temple, all which he pulled off.

23 He took also the silver and the gold, and the precious vessels: also he took the hidden treasures which he found.

24 And when he had taken all away, he went into his own land, having made a great massacre, and spoken very proudly.
This invasion of Egypt is known as the sixth Syrian war and it is documented in history. Of course Tim does not discuss this because he is dead set on twisting everything he can to "prove" Maccabees is fake history. He also says Maccabees is not cited in the New Testament but that is not true. Paul alludes to the events of Maccabees in Hebrews 11:35.
Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection:
That is a direct reference to 2 Maccabees 7.
20 But the mother was marvellous above all, and worthy of honourable memory: for when she saw her seven sons slain within the space of one day, she bare it with a good courage, because of the hope that she had in the Lord.

21 Yea, she exhorted every one of them in her own language, filled with courageous spirits; and stirring up her womanish thoughts with a manly stomach, she said unto them,

22 I cannot tell how ye came into my womb: for I neither gave you breath nor life, neither was it I that formed the members of every one of you;

23 But doubtless the Creator of the world, who formed the generation of man, and found out the beginning of all things, will also of his own mercy give you breath and life again, as ye now regard not your own selves for his laws' sake.
Clearly Paul thought the events of Maccabees happened or else he would not have included this bit in his Hall of Faith. 

As I noted Tim's invective against Maccabees is very convoluted and there is no space here to unravel it. What I have written above is quite enough to dismiss his false claims. This whole book is nonsense and I have skipped over quite a lot. Let me end with one more thing. In defending the Book of Tobit as scripture Tim says Acts 20:35 is a direct quote of Tobit 12:8.
For us, there are others we feel Charles and the 1611 KJV may not have found but this is good enough for the connection in secondary evidence. One fascinating controversial scripture is Luke writing of Paul's citation of Yahusha in Acts 20:35 "how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive." Yahusha did not appear to have said that in the Gospels anywhere and many scholars scoff instead of reconciling. However, it is a direct quote of Tobit 12:8: It is better to give alms than to lay up gold." Did Luke attribute the quote to the wrong person? Perhaps. Does that undermine the whole of scripture? Only for an idiot who is incapable of elementary understanding in these days of scoffing. 
pg. 27

However in volume 1 Tim says Acts 20:35 is a citation from Sirach. 

Also, Acts 20:35 credits Yahusha for saying “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” That is not a quote documented of Yahusha Messiah. This is a quote from Yahusha Ben Sirach 4:31 exactly.

Apocrypha Scrolls Found In Qumran And Those Not Present, Vol. 1, pg. 73

Which one is it?

This book is just more worthless garbage from Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture. There will be more. Tim hints at that in this book he is "testing" more texts in an attempt to restore the Bible. Not that the Bible needs restoring as we have the full Word of God despite Tim's assertions to the contrary.