Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture has released a brand new book just in time for Christmas. The subject is about the three Magi who visited the child Jesus Christ. Spoiler alert: the three Magi who visited Jesus Christ were actually twelve Filipino kings or Maginoos.
 |
| https://issuu.com/thegodculture/docs/three_kings_ebook |
As I am writing this sentence I have yet to read the book. But, seeing that Tim's method is the same in all of his books and videos I can guarantee that there is the same bad etymology (always remember Tim has said he is not and does not wish to be a linguist), bad geography, outright lies, railing against scholars as being ignorant and illiterate, and total misunderstanding of his sources. In several videos Tim has previously posited his thesis that the three Magi came from the Philippines and I have already debunked that claim. However, this book is a much fuller treatment of the subject matter based on a recently translated document titled Revelation of the Magi.
As with all of Tim's books and videos there is a lot of information here, the book is 236 pages, but only the most important points shall be addressed.
Imagine my shock that Tim starts off in a most ridiculous manner on the copyright page.
 |
| pg. 2 |
Vatican Document Translation From
“Revelation of the Magi: The Lost Tale of the Wise Men’s Journey to Bethlehem.”
By Brent Landau. HarperOne, An Imprint of Harper-Collins Publishers. New York. 2010. Chapters and Verses noted in each reference. Out or respect, we will only publish excerpts of the translation and will not publish this text in its entirety. We encourage everyone to attain a copy of Landau’s full translation on Amazon and other outlets. Our use of these fragments is in accordance with the Fair Use Act.
What does Tim mean "out of respect" he will not be publishing the entire text of Revelation of the Magi? Legally you cannot republish an entire copyrighted work and also you might need permission to cite other works especially if those citations are substantial. Also note the typo "Out or respect." Will Tim ever get an editor to clean up his books?
Lisa George, who is a co-host on Zen Garcia's livestreams and who has interviewed Tim several times, wrote the foreword or, as it is spelled here, foreward. She begins thusly:
The people of the Philippines have endured more hardships as a whole culture than any other on earth.
pg. 6
Is she for real? Africans brought to the New World in chains and Native Americans whose entire populations were exterminated by the Spanish might beg to differ.
The introduction is a brief rehashing of Tim's theory the Philippines is Ophir, Sheba, Tarshish, and The Garden of Eden. It's the same old stuff filled with the same old errors concerning maps, etymologies, and everything else. As Tim so pridefully notes unless you are a viewer or reader of The God Culture you won't know what he is talking about.
This understanding is not new, but an ancient view, known for thousands of years, which never should have been lost. One would struggle to find a single scholar who even knows this truth, unless they are a viewer or reader of The God Culture positions.
pg. 9
At the beginning of the introduction Tim informs us the Catholic Church knew the real history of the Magi and covered it up by hiding Revelation of the Magi in its archives for centuries.
According to the translator, Revelation of the Magi (RoTM), from the Vatican Library, is dated as early as the second century A.D. It was recently translated to English for the first time, from the Syriac language, and published by Harper-Collins Publishers in 2010. This monumental document was translated and released by Brent Landau with the assistance of numerous Harvard, Cambridge and other university professors. Though not a firm date, Landau proves this document existed at least prior to 500 A.D., which is really all one needs to know. This means it preceded the Catholic legend of Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar as false, fabricated names as well as the spurious narrative of their deriving from Persia, Arabia, and India as is still claimed in ignorance. This writing lists their names as well as their land of origin, and none match the newer legend. This is not a Biblical fact, but is against what the Bible teaches, and is hiding their region of the Magi’s ancestry. These fraudulent names should never be repeated by any church.
The Catholic Church has known this legend was false from its inception, covering up the true land for some apparently nefarious reason. Why would they not want us to know the Wise Men came from the Philippines? Is it because they conquered that region, stealing its resources for centuries? We all know Spain was part of the Holy Roman Empire, as was the United States, who would conquer the Philippines after that. The Treaty of Paris of 1783 clarifies that the King of England and the United States of America, was also, Arch-Treasurer and Prince Elector for the Holy Roman Empire, led by the Pope, ultimately. Would this mean the Catholic Church knew it was stealing the very same resources from the same land of the 3 Kings, which also happens to be the land over the Garden of Eden, even according to this Vatican Library document? Or even greater, would this indict the Catholic Church as not actually bringing Jesus (Yahusha) to the Philippines, but suppressing the original, authentic Biblical religion of a land connected in relationship to Him for at least 1,500 years prior? This Vatican document answers that question in the affirmative. What does this say of the Catholic Religion, when it squashes the actual practice of the Bible and replaces it as a clear counterfeit? Well, we certainly do not expect nor wish for the Pope’s endorsement of this research. However, prove all things and hold fast that which is good (1 Th. 5:21).
pgs. 9-10
Further on Tim claims that Revelation of the Magi was suppressed because the Vatican wanted to hide the revivals which had occurred in the Philippines prior to the arrival of the Spanish.
 |
| pg. 183 |
Not only was there revival when the Apostle Thomas arrived in ancient Ophir, there was a great revival prior to that in the Philippines. Before there were disciples and Apostles in the New Testament, a spiritual surge already began in the land of the Three Kings. Historically speaking, (though many falsely claim there is no history of the Philippines prior to Magellan in 1521), there were two great revivals in this Land of the Magi in the first century B.C. to A.D. Of course, all written history by Filipinos was discarded by the Spanish Catholics with the Pope’s blessing. This document preserved by the Vatican was originally written by Filipinos, in fact. It survives! The Papacy did not want the world to know they conquered the already Biblical Land of the Magi. Oops! This is why the Vatican left this document uninterpreted for 1,200 years.
Once again it's all about a conspiracy against the poor, oppressed people of the Philippines who are actually God's chosen people living right next to the Holy of Holies by hiding the truth from both them and the world. It is Tim's claim that a close reading of Revelation of the Magi undoes the Catholic Church's centuries long deception.
Before delving into the text of Revelation of the Magi Tim lays down some foundational principles. These are to be found in two sources. The first is the Gospel of Matthew. Tim's foundational principle from Matthew is that the text indicates it took the Magi two years to arrive in Jerusalem after Jesus was born meaning they must have come from very far away. Persia, Arabia, and India are too close for such a long journey. Therefore they arrived from the Philippines by ship sailing around Africa.
The Star was not a constellation or planetary alignment, as it could move from Jerusalem to Bethlehem. Stellarium software cannot find this Star. Its full route was from the Philippines, where it first appeared, into the Indian Ocean wherethe Magi followed it in their ship, for almost 2 years. When one learns, they originated in the Far East, this makes sense. They headed around Africa, into the Mediterranean, and finally arrived in Israel. The Star seemed to disappear at that point and reappear in the narrative (which will be affirmed). This is why they rejoiced, because they had not seen the Star since they arrived, and the journey would then continue. They would not have gone to Herod for directions if the Star had shown at that time. They would not have needed his help.
pg. 33
Imagine, the Magoi of Persia heard of the birth of the Son of Yahuah and Savior of the world, but decided to wait almost 2 years to arrive on an 8-week journey. They would seem to not be very motivated to embark upon such a journey, andalready fail the test of one deserving to be notified. This is ridiculously awry. The prospect from Saudi Arabia (whose title of ‘Magoi’ is not even appropriate), was much closer to Israel, and therefore fails each authenticity test even more so.
India is about twice the distance from Israel as Persia, and it still fails the location-based tests. It is about 4,500 km. to Jerusalem from there. Travel time would take about 180 days, based on our research, or just under 6 months. That is not two years. Go ahead and find a reason to double the estimate, and it still fails on all accounts. We know for certain the Magi traveled no less than a year, according to the Revelation of the Magi account, which we will cover. The Gospel of Matthew account holds the record of time, and his account says it was 2 years. Hopefully, we will all believe Matthew over a modern scholar.
If planning a trip from the Philippines, this would have to occur by boat. If the Kings, sons of Kings, and Wise Men met in the Visayas region; perhaps in Cebu, or nearby, they would have a much longer travel, justifying the two years. The Red Sea Port, at Ezion-Geber, was not available to Israel in that age. One would have to circumnavigate Africa, which the Greeks had already executed for more than 800 years at that point. There was no Suez Canal option then. In the first century B.C., a ship hugging the coasts (as was their custom in practice), would travel around three to four knots. At four knots, even with no breaks, one would arrive over 8,000 nautical miles away in Capetown, South Africa in about 100 days (according to Ports.com). As they were relying on wind and rowing in that age, they would need breaks in between, and typically they would not sail at night.
South Africa to Tanger, Morocco would be another 5,700 nautical miles. Let’s add another 58 days to equal 158 days, so far. Finally, the last leg of the journey from Morocco to Tel Aviv, Israel would be another 2,300 nautical miles, or about 23 days at sea. The grand total at sea, without breaks, would be somewhere around 181 days just in sea travel alone. One would need to at least double that, based on the ancient methods of not sailing at night, which would essentially be a year at sea.
One would add even more time if storms were encountered, and ships dock at coastline harbors to avoid damage to the vessel. Along with stops to trade for supplies, repairs, etc. this would likely add 6 more months. Thus, travel time could be around a year and 4 months to arrive on the coast of Israel. Then, they needed to travel to Jerusalem, (about 66 miles away), where they stayed, awaiting instructions and directions. They went to Herod during that time.
Revelation of the Magi times them arriving in Jerusalem about two months before the birthday of Jesus (Yahusha). We will cover that. Thus, total travel time was a journey of one year and ten months from the Philippines to Jerusalem. They waited there, and then they headed to Bethlehem, when the Star reappeared, a journey of only around ten miles or so. Of course, such a journey would also require planning before departure, which we did not account for in this rough math. The point is, the travel from the Philippines coalesces with the account from the Book of Matthew. All other times and locations fail miserably.
pg. 35-36
This whole scenario relies on the existence of a trade route circumnavigating Africa. Such a route never existed. I have analyzed in depth Tim's so-called proofs for this non-existent route and you can read about that here. So, if the three Magi did originate in the Philippines they would not and could not have sailed around Africa. No one was sailing around Africa until Bartolomeu Dias made the trip in 1488. Also Revelation of the Magi does not support such a journey but more of that in part 2.
It's not true that the Magi would had to have been on the road for two years. Here is Calvin's commentary on the matter.
There is some uncertainty about the date. Matthew says, that they were slain from two years old and under, according to the time which he had inquired at the Magi: from which we may infer that Christ had then reached that age, or at least was not far from being two years old. Some go farther, and conclude that Christ was about that age at the time when the Magi came. But I contend that the one does not follow from the other. With what terror Herod was seized when the report was widely spread about a new king who had been borne, we have lately seen. Fear prevented him at that time from employing a traitor, in a secret manner, to make an investigation. There is no reason to wonder that he was restrained, for some time, from the commission of a butchery so hateful and shocking, particularly while the report about the arrival of the Magi was still recent. It is certainly probable, that he revolved the crime in his mind, but delayed it till a convenient opportunity should occur. It is even possible, that he first murdered the Judges, in order to deprive the people of their leaders, and thus to compel them to look upon the crime as one for which there was no remedy.We may now conclude it to be a frivolous argument, on which those persons rest, who argue, that Christ was two years old when he was worshipped by the Magi, because, according to the time when the star appeared, Herod slew the children who were a little below two years old. Such persons take for granted, without any proper ground, that the star did not appear till after that the Virgin had brought forth her child. It is far more probable, that they had been warned early, and that they undertook the journey close upon the time of the birth of Christ, that they might see the child when lately born, in the cradle, or in his mother’s lap. It is a very childish imagination that, because they came from an unknown country, and almost from another world, they had spent about two years on the road. The conjectures stated by Osiander are too absurd to need refutation.But there is no inconsistency in the thread of the story which I propose, — that the Magi came when the period of child-bearing was not yet over, and inquired after a king who had been born, not after one who was already two years old; that, after they had returned to their own country, Joseph fled by night, but still in passing discharged a pious duty at Jerusalem, (for in so populous a city, where there was a constant influx of strangers from every quarter, he might be secure from danger;) that, after he had departed to Egypt, Herod began to think seriously about his own danger, and the ulcer of revenge, which he had nourished in his heart for more than a year and half, at length broke out. The adverb then (τότε) does not always denote in Scripture uninterrupted time, but frequently occurs, when there is a great distance between the events.
Matthew does not tell us when the star appeared. Tim assumes that the star appeared after Mary gave birth and it took two years for the Magi to arrive because Herod slaughtered all children two and under. The text says:
Matt 2:16 Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men.
Why did Herod slay not only "all the children that were in Bethlehem" but also those "in all the coasts thereof" when Jesus was born in Bethlehem and that is where the Magi went? Why not slay only those in Bethlehem? Because
he made sure of his prey by allowing a wide margin both in time and space.
Tim in his simplicity sees "two years old" and thinks that means it took the Magi two years to follow the star. It is a nonsense exegesis that simply does not follow.
As with all his teaching Tim has some weird things to say about this story.
Is this the end of their story? No. We will get to that. This was their ministry over centuries time. They were the keepers of the secret of the Star of the Messiah, which is His light, not an angel, and not something routinely found in the sky. They were to be informed, and few were. These Magi were truly righteous priests in their own right. They brought the wealth that Jesus (Yahusha) would need to start His ministry. The angel warned them not to return to Herod, so they left and returned to their homeland. Matthew has no need to continue the narrative and would not be privy to such information beyond.
pg. 34
What is the secret of the Star of the Messiah? As we shall see Revelation of the Magi testifies that the Star was the Messiah Himself. But why is this a secret the Magi alone kept? If it were true that Jesus was the Star why wouldn't that be in Matthew? And what is this nonsense about Jesus needing wealth to start his ministry? Did Mary store the gold, frankincense, and myrrh for thirty years until he started preaching? Did she bury it in Israel or did she take it to Egypt? Where is such an idea to be found in the Bible? Nowhere. Tim made it up. Thus the answer to Tim's question
Are we "storytelling" or are we presenting the facts?
pg. 161
The second source of Tim's foundational principles is to be found in Psalm 72.
 |
| pg. 39 |
First, one must address the beginning of Psalm 72 in the King James Version, which appears also in the original, authorized 1611 version, the Brenton Greek Septuagint, and the Geneva Bible as “[[A Psalm for Solomon.]]” or “[[For Solomon.]].” We have a massive issue with the rendering in double brackets being interpreted that this is a prophecy of Solomon as that is NOT there. He fails on many levels many times as this son of David is the one and only Messiah. Notice, Hopkins referred to the Messiah as a son of David which we all know is appropriate as he descended from him indeed. It says David wrote the Psalm “FOR Solomon,” not that Solomon is the subject, which he cannot be, as only the Messiah fits the description in this passage.
The likely origin of this gross interpretation and blasphemy is the Catholic Bible. In the version from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, they remove the brackets and render “Of Solomon” replacing “FOR.” They were changing the text in fraud. A Psalm written for Solomon to understand is certainly not the same as inserting Solomon as the Messiah and subject, which can be easily tested. David did not write for Solomon to know whom he was to be, but wanted him to know of the Messiah from his lineage. This becomes very obvious, as there are multiple Messianic prophesies in the passage that never fit Solomon, and they are not just a few, but many that would make this misinterpretation impossible, or at least one would think.
pgs. 42-43
What brackets is Tim talking about? There are NO brackets in the original 1611 KJV, Breton's Septuagint, or the 1560 Geneva Bibles.
 |
| 1611 KJV |
 |
| Breton's Septuagint |
 |
| 1560 Geneva Bible |
"A Psalm for (or of) Solomon" is not an addition to the text. It is what the text says. That does not mean the Psalm is ONLY about Solomon because it is also clearly a prophecy of Jesus Christ. The 1611 KJV gives this description of the Psalm:
David praying for Solomon sheweth the goodness and glory of his, in type, and in truth, of Christ's kingdom
Not only does Tim get the subject matter wrong but he also gets the geography wrong.
One must first restore the geography of Psalm 72, as well as Revelation of the Magi, and then, this is obvious.
pg. 71
And what is that restored geography?
The Three Kings were three leaders by precedence and yes, they were Kings. They originated in Ophir, Sheba and Tarshish in what we call the Philippines.
pg. 44
That means the Tarshish, Sheba, and Seba mentioned in verse 10 are the Philippines.
The kings of Tarshish and of the isles shall bring presents: the kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts.
But this is total nonsense as I have demonstrated many times on this blog. Please read through the articles on this blog and see for yourself that Tim is absolutely wrong about this so-called "restored geography." Here is John Calvin's commentary on Psalm 72:10 in full:
10.The kings of Tarshish and of the isles shall bring presents. The Psalmist still continues, as in the preceding verse, to speak of the extent of the kingdom. The Hebrews apply the appellation of Tarshish to the whole coast, which looks towards Cilicia. By the isles, therefore, is denoted the whole coast of the Mediterranean Sea, from Cilicia to Greece. As the Jews, contenting themselves with the commodities of their own country, did not undertake voyages to distant countries, like other nations; God having expressly required them to confine themselves within the limits of their own country, that they might not be corrupted by the manners of strangers; they were accustomed, in consequence of this, to apply the appellation of isles to those countries which were on the other side of the sea. I indeed admit that Cyprus, Crete, and other islands, are comprehended under this name; but I also maintain that it applies to all the territories which were situated beyond the Mediterranean Sea.
By the words
, minchah, a present, and מנחה , eshcar, a gift, must be understood any tribute or custom, and not voluntary offerings; for it is vanquished enemies, and the mark or token of their subjection, which are spoken of. These terms appear to be used intentionally in this place, in order to mitigate the odium attached to such a mark of subjugation; as if the inspired writer indirectly reproved subjects, if they defrauded their kings of their revenues. אשכר
By
, Sheba, some think Arabia is intended, and by שבא ,Seba, Ethiopia. Some, however, by the first word understand all that part of the Gulf of Arabia which lies towards Africa; and by the second, which is written with the letter שבא ,samech, the country of Sabea, the more pleasant and fruitful country. This opinion is probably the more correct of the two. It is unnecessary here to remark how foolishly this passage has been wrested in the Church of Rome. They chant this verse as referring to the philosophers or wise men who came to worship Christ; as if, indeed, it were in their power of philosophers to make kings all upon a sudden; and in addition to this, to change the quarters of the world, to make of the east the south or the west. ס
https://www.studylight.org/commentary/psalms/72-10.html#verse-cal
Calvin mentions this verse again in his commentary on Matthew 2:1.
Magi is well known to be the name given by the Persians and Chaldees to astrologers and philosophers: and hence it may readily be conjectured that those men came from Persia. As the Evangelist does not state what was their number, it is better to be ignorant of it, than to affirm as certain what is doubtful. Papists have been led into a childish error, of supposing that they were three in number: because Matthew says, that they brought gold, frankincense, and myrrh. But the historian does not say, that each of them separately presented his own gift. He rather says, that those three gifts were presented by them in common. That ancient author, whoever he may be, whose imperfect Commentary on Matthew bears the name of Chrysostom, and is reckoned among Chrysostom’s works, says that they were fourteen. This carries as little probability as the other. It may have come from a tradition of the Fathers, but has no solid foundation. But the most ridiculous contrivance of the Papists on this subject is, that those men were kings, because they found in another passage a prediction, thatthe kings of Tarshish, and of the Isles, and of Sheba,would offer gifts to the Lord, (Psalm 72:10.)Ingenious workmen, truly, who, in order to present those men in a new shape, have begun with turning the world from one side to another: for they have changed the south and west into the east! Beyond all doubt, they have been stupified by a righteous judgment of God, that all might laugh at the gross ignorance of those who have not scrupled to adulterate “and, change the truth of God into a lie,”
The fact is Psalm 72 is a prophecy of Solomon as well as Jesus and it has nothing to say about the Magi who came from the East. Tarshish, Sheba, and Seba are not the Philippines and are in a different direction altogether.
So, these are the two foundational principles Tim will be working from: The Magi travelled for two years and a restored geography of Psalm 72 will tell us the nations from which the Magi originated are the Philippines. As I have shown above both of those principles are wrong. Everything in the book that follows will be wrong. What follows is Tim's interpretation of Revelation of the Magi. I will deal with that in part 2.
