The God Culture: Noah Landed on Mt. Everest

The God Culture is just awful.  In video after video Timothy Jay Schwab leads his listeners down a rabbit hole of lies. By the end of each video one is either deeply impressed by Tim's profuse knowledge of scriptural arcana and occult history or saddened that so many people are stupid enough to be snookered into believing anything he has to say. 

In this article I want to look at video number 5 in his Flood Series.

https://youtu.be/48-XtI0JAIs

There is so much misinformation in this video it is incredible. In this short space I cannot possibly break it down bit-by-bit and give it the proper attention and justice it deserves. For that I would have to write a book. Instead I will take a look at a few items which are either lies or just plain outrageous or maybe even both.

First it is necessary to understand Tim's cosmogony.  He believes the Earth is flat and that there were no oceans before the flood.  During the flood the great waters of the deep burst forth and the waters in the heavens rained down. The waters from the deep receded into the bowels of the earth and the waters from heaven remained forming the oceans. This is why he believes the undersea trenches are the river system of The Garden of Eden which is now submerged somewhere off the coast of the Philippines. It is also why he does not believe in plate tectonics.

6:19  For those espousing pangaea, or really Pan Gaia, an occult religious belief not science, the hydroplate theory which relies on the false science of moving plates floating on magma smashing to gather understand that at 1,000 miles per hour at the equator such chaotic motion would never lead to a separation of continents but the opposite.  It would lead to there only being one continent and it would be a mountain all the way into space likely.  Accusing Yahuah of creating such chaos is a lack of faith truly and certainly not a Biblical perspective.   

Elsewhere Tim says plate tectonics is unproven.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jAQ08tJUpY&lc=Ugyl6Q3FI3sHj2ocu8d4AaABAg

We have but we reject the unproven science of moving plates floating on magma nor liquid. If we have such, a simple scientific test would tell us there would only be 1 continent and it would be a mountain into space with the earth moving at 1000 mph at the equator. No one has ever observed such. Furthermore, Moses speaks of the ancient mountains and lasting hills meaning from before the Flood. Land didn't move, it got carved out by mega tsunamis and rapid erosion. Yahuah God Bless.

The amount of ignorance here is astounding and the person Tim is replying to points that out.  I do not intend to delve into geology as there are plenty of places on the internet that explain plate tectonics and sea floor spreading and much more.  It is certainly not an unproven science.  It is a theory that fits all the observable facts. Tim has no idea what he is talking about. He is not a geologist or a scientist of any kind. Where does he get the idea that if plate tectonics were true there would be one continent reaching into space? On what calculations is he basing that nonsense?  He does not say.

For Tim having a Biblical perspective means something different than what it means for others. Usually to have a Biblical perspective means you believe God is in control, he created the world, Christ is risen, all things work for the good, and things like that.  For Tim it means if something is not explicitly in the Bible then it's not true.

9:22  But here we place scripture above false claims and the claims of man. If it cannot be proven from scripture throw it out.

This sentence is loaded with irony as Tim makes countless false claims and even defends those claims using scripture. Over-literalism of the Bible is going to lead you down a wrong path. I cannot prove from the scripture that Timothy Jay Schwab exists. Does that mean he does not exist?  I cannot prove from scripture many things that are true such as mathematics, Chinese history, and science of all kinds. Does that mean math is false and that the Chinese have no history? No, and the idea is absurd.

Robert Terry, who Tim is replying to in the Youtube comment above, replies with the following comment:

The hydroplate theory is far superior to what you have to offer. For starters- You use a “the Bible must be right” sort of reasoning to “prove” science right or wrong. This is faulty reasoning! You will likely push more people away then convince with logic like this. Frankly, you sound like a brainwashed lunatic! Don’t get me wrong, I personally believe the Bible is right..... However, I favor a more intelligent line of reasoning: what we observe “scientifically”, lines up perfectly with what the Bible says. Therefore “proving” (a term you throw around a little to freely) the Bible correct. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jAQ08tJUpY&lc=Ugyl6Q3FI3sHj2ocu8d4AaABAg

Robert is correct.  You cannot use the bible to prove if science is right or wrong as it is not a science text book. He is also right that Tim throws the word "proving" around way too freely. Tim makes claims of all kinds and then says he has now proven this or that claim. But he hasn't proven anything except that he is too willing to jump to conclusions that are unwarranted.

15:59 Before the British had the audacity to rename the tallest mountain on earth (The nerve! I mean who thinks they have the right to rename such an icon) it was called in Sanskrit and still is today in Nepal Sagarmatha which has a meaning which just cannot be possible. Can it? It means, get this, head of the ocean or forehead of the sea or sky. What? How can that be? Forehead of the sky? Ok. Certainly. That's fine. Makes sense. But forehead or head of the ocean? Where would that originate? Well that's pretty easy as the Bible just told you twice this was the case. This was where the ark landed.

Practically all of that is a lie. Sagarmatha is not an ancient name for Mt. Everest. It is a name invented by the Nepalese government recently. At least according to Walt Unsworth who is referenced on the Mt. Everest Wikipedia page.

https://www.amazon.com/Everest-Mountaineering-History-Walt-Unsworth/dp/0898866707

Tim's source for his claims is not actually listed on his slide.  Only half of the link is given.  The full link is https://www.cs.mcgill.ca/~rwest/wikispeedia/wpcd/wp/m/Mount_Everest.htm. Why not just use the regular Wikipedia page instead of the Wiki archive at the above link? It does not make sense. Even that strange page tells us that the name Sagarmatha was invented in the 1960's!

In Nepal, the mountain is called Sagarmatha (सगरमाथा, Sanskrit for "Head of the Ocean"); this name was invented in the early 1960s (by Baburam Acharya) when the Nepalese government realized that Mount Everest had no Nepalese name. This was because the mountain was not known and named in ethnic Nepal (the Kathmandu valley and surrounding areas). The Sherpa/Tibetan name Chomolangma was not acceptable, as it would have been against the idea of unification (Nepalization) of the country. However, the ancient name for the mountain is Devgiri (in Sanskrit, it means "holy mountain") or Devadurga (the English pronounced it as deodungha in the 1800s); please refer to the Harrapan archaeology site for more on the history behind the name. In Tibetan it is Chomolungma or Qomolangma (ཇོ་མོ་གླང་མ) ("Mother of the Universe"), or in Chinese: 珠穆朗瑪峰 ( pinyin: Zhūmùlǎngmǎ Fēng) or 聖母峰 (Shèngmǔ Fēng).

Why is Tim trying to pass off Sagarmatha as being an ancient name for Mt. Everest? His own source shows that he is lying! Did he not read the whole paragraph? This is also the only place I see interpreting Sagarmatha as Head of the Ocean. One website explicitly says "sagar" does not mean ocean.

Sagarmatha is a Sanskrit word, from sagar = "sky" (not to be confused with "sea/ocean") and matha = "forehead" or "head", and is the modern Nepali name for Mount Everest. 

https://www.grida.no/resources/3031

Elsewhere, as on the Wikipedia page for Mt. Everest, the name is interpreted as "Goddess of the Sky" and Encyclopedia Britannica has "Peak of Heaven."

The Sanskrit name Sagarmatha means literally “Peak of Heaven.”

https://www.britannica.com/place/Mount-Everest

A few minutes after this Tim claims that Google maps proves that Noah landed on Mt. Everest.

18:02 So Noah did not land and stay on the very summit but it slid down. And would you look at this? This is right from Google maps from the satellite view and inset sweet view.  What the name of this place next to what they call the Hillary Step, which is where they stage climbs of Mt. Everest, well its none other than Arkhale! Wait a minute.  Even Google maps records to this day that the ark landed there. What!?

The Hillary Step is where they stage climbs of Mt. Everest?  No!  That would be base camp.

The Hillary Step was a nearly vertical rock face with a height of around 12 metres (39 ft) located very high on Mount Everest at approximately 8,790 metres (28,839 ft) above sea level, near the summit. It was located on the southeast ridge, halfway between the "South Summit" and the true summit, and it gave climbers the last real challenge before reaching the top of the mountain via the southeast route.

The Hillary Step was destroyed most likely during a massive earthquake that hit the region in 2015

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

The Hillary Step was basically near the peak of the mountain. It no longer exists. As for Arkhale it is listed as an area on Everest on Google maps. There is no information on this place as far as I can find so it's not clear what it is exactly. Tim makes way too much ado about this place. If Arkhale is a special name proving that Noah's ark landed on Mt. Everest then why is there a village in Nepal called Arkhale? This small village even has it's own Wikipedia page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkhale,_Khotang

Did he even consider this fact? Again Tim has no idea what he is talking about. But he sure sounds like he does. Rather than telling us the Sanskrit meaning of Arkhale he foolishly attempts to make this name into a Hebrew word meaning Ark Hallelujah! What a cunning linguist!

Next Tim answers questions asked by viewers.

20:01 Now did Noah need an oxygen mask on Mt. Everest? Well, no. The base camp, also known as Arkhale on Google we just showed you is actually 3,500 meters below the summit where the ark would have slid down to as the water level lowered and as you can see from the picture oxygen is not needed like it is in scaling the summit obviously. However once again this is right after the flood and the world ecosystem is not what it is today.   

According to science oxygen levels prior to the flood based on petrified sap bubbles would have been much greater.  Not only does this answer why Noah had no issue with oxygen but also good reason as to why the lifespans of Noah's ancestors were so much longer before the flood.  They had more oxygen.

Again Arkhale is NOT base camp.

Tim does not answer the question though he thinks he does. First of all in Tim's scheme Noah is floating in a boat ABOVE Mt. Everest for a few months. That is a problem and the issue is not the amount of oxygen in the air but the fact that at higher altitudes the atmosphere gets thinner making it more difficult to breathe. Gravity draws the oxygen towards the surface so there is less oxygen the higher you ascend.

When you travel to a place above about 8,000 feet, your body starts telling you there’s something seriously wrong with the air up there. The “thin” air at high altitudes has considerably less oxygen and pressure. This is because the earth’s gravity holds the oxygen close to the surface — so much so that half of the oxygen in the atmosphere is found below 18,000 feet. 

https://scienceline.org/2015/02/why-do-you-feel-so-awful-at-high-altitudes/

Did Tim forget that Noah and all the animals had been sitting 15 cubits above Mt. Everest for several months? The source for his answer is stunning for all it's hypocrisy.

“One implication is that the atmospheric pressure of the Earth would have been much greater during the Cretaceous era, when the bubbles formed in the resin. A dense atmosphere could also explain how the ungainly pterosaur, with its stubby body and wing span of up to 11 meters, could have stayed airborne, he said. The spread of angiosperms, flowering plants, during the Cretaceous era could have caused the high oxygen levels reported by Berner and Landis, scientists said last week.” (Anderson, Ian, “Dinosaurs Breathed Air Rich in Oxygen,” New Scientist, vol. 116, 1987, p. 25.)

https://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/early-earth/atmosphere/

The Cretaceous era?  Does Tim now believe in long geologic periods of time consisting of millions of years?? Why would he quote a piece from an article based on a science he rejects as false!? That is hypocrisy. He also wrongly attributes that quote to Leah Crane's article "Earth could have more water than we thought while exoplanets have less."

21:31  How did the animals scale Mt. Everest?  Well, just like this little guy perhaps? Actually that would not be necessary at all because again the ark did not stay on the very tip of the summit as some erroneously speculate and they would have had a much easier time from the base camp or Arkhale area going down. 

As showed above Arkhale is NOT base camp so if the ark did land at Arkhale they would certainly have had to scale the mountain. Tim is ignoring the elephant in the room here.  The elephant in the ark actually. How would the elephants have walked down the mountain and to Africa?

If you have followed this series of articles about The God Culture or actually watched their videos you should know that The God Culture does not do archaeology.  A commenter pointed this out on their Youtube page for this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48-XtI0JAIs&lc=UgwJAgYCp764Bne8FuZ4AaABAg.8xlYfIXFSH48xnfSm-ZT_k

@Tribe of Judah shallow claim? The Turkish government thought it was confirmation enough to turn the area into a nation park so they might disagree with you. Not to mention the narrator is using what the internet? Ron wyatt actually went out and tested what he knew to be true like the bible says to do.

This person is correct.  All of Tim's "research" is based on him reading articles on the internet and putting things together like a math problem.  He has not gone into the real world to find support for his claims.  He will never show you the ruins of the palace of the Queen of Sheba. Tim actually thinks those who demand he show archeological proofs for his claims are operating within an occult paradigm.

25:33 But if Noah and his sons landed on Mt. Everest can we find additional support that they actually settled there? Hm? We can find support. Let's go for it. Which frankly this far back is rather miraculous when you think about it given the circumstances. These are extremely ancient and to think they left archaeology to find may not be so simple and to hold one to that standard as a must is really an occult paradigm that assumes that we must find great architecture in order to prove recorded history especially in an era not known for great architecture largely.

Right here Tim disavows archaeology.  He does not need it and to demand such proof from him is evil. That is ridiculous! He will also falsely go on to say this:

41:50 And finally though we could go on and on the ark has never been found nor unearthed nor one ounce of archaeology ever done to prove it sits in any form on top of that mountain in Turkey.  

That is a very stupid thing to say. Sure the ark has never been found but plenty of people including Ron Wyatt have done extensive archeological excavations in Turkey to look for the ark. To this day such research continues. Just a few weeks ago Forbidden History released an episode about the search for Noah's Ark. Tim does not have to agree with the research but to say such research has never occurred is not true. It is only Tim who is making great claims who has done ZERO archeological research.

What about Ararat? What about the alleged finds in Turkey? Tim has an answer for that too.

31:41 Egypt is more likely a Nephilim community in those days, not human. Nephilim may have proceeded them in Mesopotamia as well as they certainly lived there and frankly if there was a ship found on Mt. Ararat in Turkey, or whatever it used to be called when it had a real name not a fake one that was assigned to it that is even wrong, it is far more likely a Nephilim vessel carrying giants over the flood. See they survived somehow. And remember they do not have the breath of life and all with the breath of life perished during the flood at least of those not on the ark. Nephilim do not have the breath of life. 

I do not even know how to respond to that. It's so bizarre and stupid and contrary to the scriptures which say the flood killed all life. Marine life excepted of course. But according to Tim the Nephilim built an ark and survived the flood founding Egypt and Mesopotamia and their boat is what has been mistaken for Noah's! The appropriate response is a hearty belly busting laugh.

This will bring us to the last part of the review and that is Timothy's comments about Josephus.

43:08 Mt. Ararat in Turkey is the wrong mountain. Period. But there did this originate?  In all fairness to modern scholars not them, they didn't make this up, this comes from Joesphus. An occult legend in fact which he cites. But come on scholars. Test things at least a little.  Don't accept the word of a self admitted Pharisee over the Bible quoting occult legend. Test it. Now we will. 

In Antiquities of the Jews Flavius Josephus propagates this myth based on occult pagan legend and not scripture. Here he quotes whom he even admits to be a Chaldean or better termed magician or sorcerer an enemy of the prophets, the writers of the Bible. So not a likely source to pin doctrine.   

Berosus the Chaldean says, this is Josephus' writing, It is said there is still some part of the ship in Armenia at the mountain of the Cordyaeans (That's Mt. Judi or Mt. Ararat same thing) and that some people carry of pieces of the bitumen which they take away and use chiefly as amulets for the averting of mischiefs or evil spirits. 

What a nice story. Ok so bad enough you quote an occult high priest of satanism basically but you then apply his magic amulet lore? Way to go Joe! You really screwed that one up because the Bible says you are wrong.  

Again this is just ridiculous! Has Tmothy actually read Josephus? It seem the answer is no. Did he even read or understand the quote that is on his slide? He certainty did not read the whole thing in the video! He does not even cite it correctly!  It's not chapter 3 verses 5 and 6! It's Book 1, Chpater 3, SECTIONS 5 and 6.  Those are long paragraphs. Let me cite them for you. All of the quotes will come from Gutenberg.

First section 5.

5. When God gave the signal, and it began to rain, the water poured down forty entire days, till it became fifteen cubits higher than the earth; which was the reason why there was no greater number preserved, since they had no place to fly to. When the rain ceased, the water did but just begin to abate after one hundred and fifty days, [that is, on the seventeenth day of the seventh month,] it then ceasing to subside for a little while. After this, the ark rested on the top of a certain mountain in Armenia; which, when Noah understood, he opened it; and seeing a small piece of land about it, he continued quiet, and conceived some cheerful hopes of deliverance. But a few days afterward, when the water was decreased to a greater degree, he sent out a raven, as desirous to learn whether any other part of the earth were left dry by the water, and whether he might go out of the ark with safety; but the raven, finding all the land still overflowed, returned to Noah again. And after seven days he sent out a dove, to know the state of the ground; which came back to him covered with mud, and bringing an olive branch: hereby Noah learned that the earth was become clear of the flood. So after he had staid seven more days, he sent the living creatures out of the ark; and both he and his family went out, when he also sacrificed to God, and feasted with his companions. However, the Armenians call this place, [GREEK] The Place of Descent; for the ark being saved in that place, its remains are shown there by the inhabitants to this day.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2848/2848-h/2848-h.htm#link2HCH0003

That is Josephus' very own testimony about Noah's ark and the flood. It is after this that he cites other barbarian historians to prove that the flood is attested to by the whole world! This intent is shown clearly in sections 6 and 9.

6. Now all the writers of barbarian histories make mention of this flood, and of this ark; among whom is Berosus the Chaldean. For when he is describing the circumstances of the flood, he goes on thus: "It is said there is still some part of this ship in Armenia, at the mountain of the Cordyaeans; and that some people carry off pieces of the bitumen, which they take away, and use chiefly as amulets for the averting of mischiefs." Hieronymus the Egyptian also, who wrote the Phoenician Antiquities, and Mnaseas, and a great many more, make mention of the same. Nay, Nicolaus of Damascus, in his ninety-sixth book, hath a particular relation about them; where he speaks thus: "There is a great mountain in Armenia, over Minyas, called Baris, upon which it is reported that many who fled at the time of the Deluge were saved; and that one who was carried in an ark came on shore upon the top of it; and that the remains of the timber were a great while preserved. This might be the man about whom Moses the legislator of the Jews wrote." 

9. Now when Noah had lived three hundred and fifty years after the Flood, and that all that time happily, he died, having lived the number of nine hundred and fifty years. But let no one, upon comparing the lives of the ancients with our lives, and with the few years which we now live, think that what we have said of them is false; or make the shortness of our lives at present an argument, that neither did they attain to so long a duration of life, for those ancients were beloved of God, and [lately] made by God himself; and because their food was then fitter for the prolongation of life, might well live so great a number of years: and besides, God afforded them a longer time of life on account of their virtue, and the good use they made of it in astronomical and geometrical discoveries, which would not have afforded the time of foretelling [the periods of the stars] unless they had lived six hundred years; for the great year is completed in that interval. Now I have for witnesses to what I have said, all those that have written Antiquities, both among the Greeks and barbarians; for even Manetho, who wrote the Egyptian History, and Berosus, who collected the Chaldean Monuments, and Mochus, and Hestieus, and, besides these, Hieronymus the Egyptian, and those who composed the Phoenician History, agree to what I here say: Hesiod also, and Hecatseus, Hellanicus, and Acusilaus; and, besides these, Ephorus and Nicolaus relate that the ancients lived a thousand years. But as to these matters, let every one look upon them as he thinks fit.

Josephus is not quoting Berosus as if he is telling the truth in all things.  In fact he cites several authors and his intent is to show that the story of Noah is universally attested to! But does Tim tell us that? NO!! Tim's intent is to malign Josephus as he does elsewhere in the Psalm 83 war videos for instance. Josephus makes one more reference to Noah's ark in the last book of the Antiquities. From Book 20 chapter 2, section 2:

2. But when Monobazus was grown old, and saw that he had but a little time to live, he had a mind to come to the sight of his son before he died. So he sent for him, and embraced him after the most affectionate manner, and bestowed on him the country called Carra; it was a soil that bare amomum in great plenty: there are also in it the remains of that ark, wherein it is related that Noah escaped the deluge, and where they are still shown to such as are desirous to see them.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2848/2848-h/2848-h.htm#link202HCH0002

Carra is today known as Harran, Turkey. Josephus and all of tradition is very clear that the ark landed in Turkey! As the Bible says the mountains of Ararat.  Not Mt. Everest.  There are NO traditions of Noah in Nepal.  That is very significant and Tim ignores that except to dismiss it with his Nephilim doctrine.

This article has run on long enough so it is time to end. I am sorry I cannot deal with all the lies in this video but what I have written is enough. I do have one more thing to write about. Did you ever wonder what color Noah was?  Tim knows!

https://youtu.be/jLNDoWunIsk

1:51 Now this is a quick, brief side note. Before completely diving in notice we use a photo of an albino for Noah. That's not a white dude, he's albino. Now why would we do this?  See Noah was not white but a milky white similar to that skin tone of the Nephilim with blue glowing eyes according to the Book of Enoch and Genesis Apocryphon. Noah's father Lamech was concerned by the appearance of his son because he looked smilier to a Nephilim. Now he was no Nephilim. There is no tie there and that's all proven out very well.  Lamech goes to Methuselah who then finds Enoch in the Garden of Eden in this same place the same land we've covered, Parvaim is the language used in Genesis Apocryphon or Sefar, Sefarvaim same word in Hebrew. Known as Havilah in Genesis 2. This is why we depict Noah as an albino. 

Now don't go and look up the vision challenges and other health issues of albinos and say "oh that means Noah had..." no. Those are impertinent. Noah was not that type of albino. He was special because through him all races would be retained and we believe this is how. This is why we see overwhelming evidence from history that Ham, at least his peoples, were black. Shem was dark skinned or medium brown or red. And we will discuss that in the next video. And Japheth was white generally if nothing else. Many try to pull that together but ignore Noah himself may have actually been the one carrying all the genes of what we call races today. Though there is actually only one race. It's called the human race and that's all we actually have.  Everything else is manufactured.

Blue glowing eyes? Are you telling me that Noah was a Fremen? Was he the Kwisatz Haderach?

On a serious note, if this can be called serious, Tim's picture of Noah does not even match the description in the Book of Enoch.

CHAP. 106.—And after some days, my son Methuselah took a wife for his son Lamech, and she became pregnant by him, and gave birth to a son. 

2. His body was white as snow and red as the bloom of a rose, and the hair of his head was white as wool, and his eyes beautiful; and when he opened his eyes, they illuminated the whole house like the sun, and the whole house became exceedingly light. 

3. And as he was taken from the hand of the midwife, he opened his mouth, and conversed with the Lord of justice. 

4. And his father Lamech was afraid of him, and fled, and came to his father Methuselah.  

5. And he said to him: “I have begotten a singular son, unlike a man, but similar to the children of the angels of heaven, and his creation is different, and not like ours, and his eyes are like the feet [i.e. rays] of the sun, his face glorious. 

6. And it seems to me he is not from me, but from the angels; and I fear that wonderful things will happen in his days over the earth. 

7. And now, my father, I am here petitioning and asking of thee that thou shouldst go to Enoch, our father, and hear of him the truth, for he has his dwelling-place with the angels.” 

8. And when Methuselah had heard the words of his son, he came to me, at the ends of the earth, for he had heard that I was there, and cried aloud, and I heard his voice and came to him. And I said to him: “Behold, here I am, my son, because thou hast come to me.” 

9. And he answered and said to me: “I have come to thee concerning a great thing, and concerning a disturbing vision it is that I have approached. 

10. And now, my father, hear me, for there has been born to my son Lamech a son, whose similarity and kind is not like the kind of men; his color is whiter than snow, and redder than the bloom of a rose, and the hair of his head is whiter than white wool, and his eyes like the feet [i.e. rays] of the sun; and he opened his eyes, and they illuminated the whole house. 

11. And when he was taken from the hands of the midwife, he opened his mouth, and blessed the Lord of heaven. 

12. And his father Lamech was afraid, and fled to me, and did not believe that he was from him, but that his similarity was from the angels of heaven; and behold I have come to thee that thou shouldst teach me justice [i.e. the truth].” 

https://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/The-book-of-Enoch.pdf

According to Enoch the eyes of Noah are not blue and glowing like a spice eater but bright like the rays of the sun. The R.H. Charles translation even says his hair was long. Tim can't even get that right!