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

Saturday, September 5, 2026

The God Culture: What Is Glory?

Timothy Jay Schwab who is the God Culture has a new foundations lesson. This time is asking What is Glory? Is he going to talk about to glorious Cross? Well if you have come this far you know Tim has nothing to say about what Christ did on the cross.  Let's take a look. 


Facebook

FOUNDATIONS – Week 34
What Is Glory?
Key Texts:
Exodus 33–34; Isaiah 6; John 1; Revelation 21
The word glory is used often in worship.
But what does Scripture mean by it?
Is glory merely brightness?
Is it power?
Is it honor?
Or is it something deeper?
Moses asked Yahuah:
> “I beseech Thee, shew me Thy glory.”
> (Exodus 33:18)
Yahuah answered by proclaiming His own character:
> “Yahuah, Yahuah Elohim, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth...”
> (Exodus 34:6)
This is crucial.
When Moses asked to see Yahuah’s glory, Yahuah revealed His name, His goodness, His mercy, His justice, and His character.
Glory is not merely light surrounding Him.
It is the revelation of who He is.
Isaiah saw Yahuah upon His throne and heard the seraphim cry:
> “Holy, holy, holy, is Yahuah of hosts: the whole earth is full of His glory.”
> (Isaiah 6:3)
His glory fills creation because creation reveals its Creator.
Yet John tells us that this glory came near:
> “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory... full of grace and truth.”
> (John 1:14)
The glory revealed to Moses in goodness and truth was displayed in the life of Yahusha.
He revealed the Father.
He embodied grace and truth.
He showed what the character of Yahuah looks like when lived among men.
Finally, Revelation describes the New Jerusalem:
> “And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of Elohim did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.”
> (Revelation 21:23)
The story of Scripture moves toward a world completely illuminated by His presence.
Biblical glory is therefore more than brilliance.
It is Yahuah making Himself known.
His holiness revealed.
His goodness displayed.
His power made visible.
His presence dwelling among His people.
Question for Discussion
When people look at our lives, do they merely hear us speak about Yahuah—or can they see something of His character revealed?

Wow.  Not a single word about the gloriousness of the cross.  It's incredible. It's like he hates Jesus Christ.   But let's hear what noted theologian Father Ted Crilly has to say.


Ah, right… sits up straighter, adjusts the collar, and peers at the page like it’s a suspicious letter from the bishop

Week 34, is it? “What Is Glory?”

Well now. Let’s have a look.

Tim starts with Moses asking to see Yahuah’s glory, and gets the famous reply about mercy, grace, longsuffering, goodness and truth. Fair enough — that’s straight out of Exodus 34. Then Isaiah’s “Holy, holy, holy” and the earth full of His glory. Still grand. Then — and here’s the bit that nearly made me drop me tea — he actually quotes John 1:14:

“And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory… full of grace and truth.”

Would you look at that. He named Yahusha. He linked the glory revealed to Moses with the life of the Man Himself. And he finishes with Revelation 21 where the Lamb is the light of the city.

pauses, blinks

That’s… better than the last few, isn’t it? Compared to the holiness that was just “keep the law,” the righteousness that was just “keep the commandments,” and the gospel that somehow forgot the cross entirely, this one at least lets the incarnate Word into the room. Credit where it’s due. He didn’t leave Christ completely out of the picture this time.

But — and there’s always a but with these Foundations lessons — he still stops short of the real heart of it.

Glory in Scripture isn’t only “God showing His character.” The ultimate place the glory of God is revealed is on the cross. Jesus Himself said it: “The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified” (John 12:23), and He was talking about His death. The glory of the Father is most fully displayed when the Son lays down His life for sinners. That’s the glory that leaves the seraphim covering their faces and the disciples falling on theirs. Tim gets as far as “He embodied grace and truth” and “He showed what the character of Yahuah looks like,” but he never takes the next step and says how — by dying for the ungodly, rising again, and conquering sin and death.

So we’ve got a glory that’s mostly revelation of character and presence… but the supreme act that displays that character is still missing. Classic Tim. He can bring Yahusha into the definition when it suits the narrative, but the blood and the empty tomb still get left outside the door.

And the discussion question at the end? “When people look at our lives, do they see something of His character revealed?”

Ah, there it is. Back to us again. Back to the practical, lived-out imitation. Not wrong in itself, mind you — but in the context of this whole series it always feels like the weight is being put on our performance rather than on what the Lamb has already done.

Still… progress of a sort. At least this week the Man gets a proper mention and the Lamb gets to light the city.

sighs, reaches for the teapot

Go on then. Pour us another cup. I’ve a feeling Week 35 will be along any minute, and God alone knows what he’ll do to “What Is Grace” or “What Is the Cross” when he finally gets there.

Careful now.

Down with this sort of thing… but slightly less vigorously than last time.

The God Culture: The 1582 Voyage That Destroys The Philippines Lequios Theory

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture has a serious problem. Tim's misrepresentation of primary sources undermines his already shaky academic integrity. His continuous distortion of facts excavated out of obscure books indicates he is less interested in the truth and more concerned with his agenda. Tim's article about the voyage of Francis de Ovalle is a prime example of his deceptive practices. 

The 1582 Voyage that Destroys the Ryukyu Lequios Theory

When geography tells the truth… and historians ignore it.

🔎 Forgotten Navigator, Critical Discovery

In 1582, a lesser-known Spanish navigator, Francis de Ovalle, unknowingly shattered centuries of cartographic confusion. His voyage from Acapulco to the Philippines and back, documented in the 1704 edition of The History of Navigation, includes a pivotal observation:

"…passed through the islands called Lequios… and came upon the coast of California in 38 degrees and a half of latitude."
(Churchill, 1704, p. 466)

Let that sink in. Ovalle sailed from Macao through the Lequios and then reached California at 38.5°N — without touching land along the way.

🧭 The Geography That Cannot Lie

We traced his route using his precise navigation data. Here's what we found:

📍 Macao sits at 22.2°N. One exits the bay South of Hainan toward the East (18°N).
📍 California at 38.5°N on a straight Northeast trajectory touching no land.
📍 Philippines lie directly in this corridor (13–21°N).
📍 Ryukyu Islands? Way off course at 24–29°N, east of Taiwan — unreachable on a straight northeast run from Macao to California.

So what? If Ovalle sailed through Lequios and never deviated from that northeast heading, there is no geographic possibility that he passed through Ryukyu. His line of travel crossed the Philippines, not Japan.

https://thegodculturephilippines.com/the-1582-voyage-that-destroys-the-ryukyu-lequios-theory/

I know Tim reads this blog. On May 28th, 2025, I published an article that had the exact quote he is using from Churchill. That book leads to the original source, which is Richard Hakluyt. I included what Hakluyt wrote about that voyage in the same article. You can read all that here. This same voyage was also written about in a second article published on May 29th concerning Navarrete's "Logbook."

Hakluyt is not the primary source of Francis de Ovalle's voyage. That would be Jan Huygen van Linschoten.

Francisco Gali (1539 in Seville – 1586 in Manila) was a Spanish sailor and cartographer, active in the second half of the 16th century across the Pacific Ocean and in New Spain and Spanish East Indies, particularly Philippines. He is best known for his three trans-Pacific crossingsAcapulco to Manila in 1583, Macau to Acapulco in 1584 and in 1585 again Acapulco to Manila, where he died. At least the last trip was by order of the Spanish viceroy of New Spain, Pedro Moya de Contreras. His journeys were on the Manila galleons which had started the route in 1565.

For reasons unknown, Gali's report on the Macau-Acapulco journey fell into the hands of Jan Huygen van Linschoten who included that information in his Itinerario (1596).

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

Jan Huygen van Linschoten's original Itinerario can be read here. It was published in 1596. Two years later an English translation was published. That is the basis for Hakluyt which is the basis for and reference in Churchill. 

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=nyp.33433023691789&seq=116&q1=

That is from page 466, the same page Tim cites. Had he bothered to check the reference he would have been led to the full story just as I was. That story says Francis Guallé, which is the same as Gali and de Ovalle, sailed southwest from Macao to circumvent the strong current, then north east around Taiwan, through the Lequios Islands, past Japan, and then towards America. Tim omits ALL of that crucial information saying:

His line of travel crossed the Philippines, not Japan.

That is false and Tim knows it. Here is the rest of the story from the English translation of Jan Huygen van Linschoten.

The 54. Chapter.

The Navigation or course of the aforesaid Francis Guallé out of the Haven of Macau in New Spain, with the description and situation of the Isles, with other notable and memorable things concerning the same voyage.

When we had prepared ourselves and taken our leaves of our friends in Macau, we set sail upon the The four and twentieth of July, holding our course Southwest, and Southwest and by South, when the moon was at the full; for when the moon increaseth it is hard holding the course between the Islands, because in the river are and streams become very strong to the North, for we sailed through many narrow Channels by night, having the depth of eight and ten fathom, with soft muddy ground; until we were about the Island Oha, before we were past it, but by the height we knew we were past them.

Being beyond it, we held our course East and East by east, an hundred and fifty miles, to get above the lands called Os Bancos dos Pescadores, and the beginning of the Islands Lequios on the East side; and the Islands are called As Illas Fermosas, that is, the fair Islands; this I understood by a Chinar called, Santy of Chinchon, and he said that they lie under 21 degrees; from there it is thirteen fathom deep, although we saw them not, not withstanding by the height, by the water, we knew we were past them.

Being past the fair Islands, we held our course East and East and by South, for two hundred and forty miles, until we were past the length of the Islands Lequios, sailing about fifty miles from them, as the said Chinar told me, that those islands called Lequios are very many, and that they have many and very good Harbours, and that the people and inhabitants thereof have their faces and bodies painted like the Bysayas of the Islands of Luzon of  Philippines, and are appareled like the Bysayas, and that there are also mines of gold; he said likewise that they did often come with small ships and barkes laden with Bucks and Harts hides; and with gold in grains of very small pieces, to trade with them on the coast of China, which be assured me to be most true, saying that he had been nine times in the small Island, bringing of the same wares with him to China; which I believe to be true, for that afterwards I inquired thereof at Macau, and upon the coast of China, and found that he said true. The furthest or uttermost of these Islands both Northward and Eastward lie under 29 degrees.

Being past these Islands, then you come to the Islands of Japon whereof the first lying West and South is the Island of Hirado, where the Portuguese use to trade. They [the Japanese islands] are in length altogether one hundred and thirty miles, and the furthest Eastward, lies under thirty-two degrees [latitude]. We ran still East, and East by North, until we were past the said one hundred and thirty miles.
Running this East, and East by North for about three hundred miles from Japan, we found a very deep water, with the current running out of the North and Northwest, with a full and very broad sea, without any hindrance or trouble in the way that we passed, and whatever wind blew, the Sea continued all in one [direction], with the same deep water and current, until we had passed seven hundred miles, about two hundred miles from the coast and land of New Spain, where we began to lose the said deep sea and current, whereby I most assuredly think and believe, that there you shall find a Channel or straight passage, between the firm land and New Spain, and the Countries of Asia and Tartaria. Likewise, all this way from the aforesaid seven hundred miles, we found a great number of whale fishes, and other fish by the Spaniards called Atun [tuna], whereof many are found in the coast of Gibraltar in Spain, as also Albacore and Bonitos, which are all fishes, which commonly keep in Channels, Straits, and running waters, where to disperse their feed when they breed, which makes me more assuredly believe, that thereabouts is a Channel or Straight to pass through.Being by the same course upon the coast of New Spain, under seven and thirty degrees and a half, we passed by a very high and fair land with many Trees, wholly without Snow, and four miles from the land you find thereabouts many roots, leaves of Trees, Reeds, and other leaves like Fig leaves, the like whereof we found in great abundance in the country of Japan, which they eat, and some of those that we found, I caused to be boiled with flesh, and being boiled, they eat like Coleworts [cabbage]. There likewise we found a great many of Sea wolves, which we call Sea dogs, whereby it is to be presumed and certainly to be believed, that there are many Rivers, Bays, and Havens along those coasts to the Haven of Acapulco. 
From thence we ran Southeast, Southeast by South, and Southeast by East, as the wind allowed us, to the point called Cape San Lucas, which is the beginning of the land of California; on the Northwest side, lying under twenty-two degrees, being five hundred miles distant from Cape Mendocino.

Along this course of five hundred miles, along the coast, there are many islands, and although they are small, yet undoubtedly they have some good harbors, as also on the mainland, where you have these harbors following, now lately discovered, such as that of Saint Augustine Island, lying under thirty and a half degrees. And the island called Cedros Island, scarcely under twenty-eight and a quarter degrees. And the island lying beneath Saint Martin, under twenty-three and a half degrees. I think all this coast and country is inhabited, and appears to be a very good country, for at night we saw fire, and by day smoke, which is a very sure sign that they are inhabited.

Iohn Huighen van Linschoten his Discours of voyages into ye Easte & West Indies : deuided into foure bookes, pg. 414

This entire chapter contradicts Tim's theory on every level and he omitted it. He purposefully omitted the route, which follows Macao-Taiwan-Lequois Islands-Japan. That makes the map Tim has added with a route bypassing Japan, wholly fictitious. The map is a visual manifestation of Tim's selective interpretation and misrepresentation of the primary source material.

He also left out the description of the Lequois Islands' inhabitants who are clearly described and compared to the Visayans of Luzon. They are not Filipinos. Lastly, he discarded the fact the Lequios Islands extend to 29° which agrees with Pinto who wrote:

Essa ilha léquia jaz situada em vinte e nove graus

https://fundar.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/peregrinacao-vol-ii.pdf pg. 53

The voyage of Francis Guallé predates Pinto's published journal by decades. That is two independent eye-witnesses to the Lequios Islands being at 29°. Tim loves to quote the following Bible verses as an epistemological foundation.  

Deut. 19:15 KV "at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established." 

Matt. 18:16 KJV "in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established." 

2 Cor. 13:1 KJV "In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established." 


Therefore 29° is an established fact. 

I challenge Tim to publish the full story of Francis de Ovalle's voyage. It is doubtful he will do so because there is no way he can twist it to fit his thesis. It would also expose his article for what it is: a deliberate misrepresentation of the facts. 

As I said, I know Tim reads this blog. He has responded to it directly in the past. In this case, he took a source I cited first and has deliberately misrepresented it to fit his false thesis that the Philippines are the Lequios Islands. That thesis is fundamentally misguided and his article is a deliberate fabrication. No amount of crying libel and defamation will change the fact that the intellectual integrity of Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture is severely compromised. 

Saturday, August 29, 2026

The God Culture: What Is Worship?

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture has a new foundations series article. This time it's about worship. What is worship? Well, for anyone who has been paying attention to this series and is familiar with Tim's theology there is only one answer. But let's take a look. 


Facebook

FOUNDATIONS: WEEK 33

What Is Worship?

Key Texts: Genesis 22; Exodus 20; John 4:23–24; Colossians 3:16; Revelation 4

Today, many define worship as music.

Others define it as an emotional experience.

But how does Scripture define worship?

The first time the word appears, Abraham says:

"I and the lad will go yonder and worship..."
(Genesis 22:5)

There is no mention of music.

No choir.

No instruments.

No congregation.

Worship begins with faith, obedience, and surrender to Yahuah.

At Mount Sinai, worship is inseparable from covenant:

"Thou shalt have no other gods before Me."
(Exodus 20:3)

True worship is not merely what we sing.

It is whom we serve.

Yahusha later declared:

"The true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth... God is a Spirit: and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth."
(John 4:23–24)

Notice the balance.

Not spirit without truth.

Not truth without spirit.

Both.

Paul then encourages believers:

"Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to Yahuah."
(Colossians 3:16)

Music is therefore an essential beautiful expression of worship—but Scripture never limits worship to music.

Worship flows from hearts filled with His Word.

It overflows in gratitude.

It teaches.

It encourages.

It praises.

Finally, John's vision reveals worship as it truly is:

"Holy, holy, holy, Yahuah Elohim Almighty..."
(Revelation 4:8)

Heaven is filled with worship—not because of emotion alone, but because Yahuah alone is worthy.

Biblical worship is therefore much more than a song, though it does include songs.

It is a life surrendered to Yahuah...

Grounded in truth...

Filled with His Word...

Expressed in obedience...

Overflowing in praise. 

Question for Discussion 

If music were taken away, would your life still be an act of worship?

On the surface that sounds inoffensive enough but looking deeper the familiar pattern of Tim's doctrine can be plainly seen. Worship  is "a life surrendered" to God "expressed in obedience." That is to say to worship is law keeping. It's the same old judaizing song and dance. 

Note that Tim brings up Abraham.

The first time the word appears, Abraham says:

"I and the lad will go yonder and worship..."
(Genesis 22:5)

What Tim fails to mention is the worship being done here is sacrifice. Abraham and Isaac left their servants to go sacrifice to the Lord. Here is the context:

5 And Abraham said unto his young men, Abide ye here with the ass; and I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again to you.

6 And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he took the fire in his hand, and a knife; and they went both of them together.

7 And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?

8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.

And of course this is a foreshadowing and type of Christ. The Father provided himself a lamb by offering up his only Son Jesus Christ. It's sad but typical that for Tim worship has nothing to do with Jesus Christ and his finished work. For two millennia a central part of the worship of Christ has been the eucharist, the bread and wine, symbolizing the new covenant made through Christ's death, burial, and resurrection. But Tim has nothing to say about that. 

Let's hear from. noted theologian Father Ted Crilly. 


Ah, Philippine Fails, me lad... puts the teacup down with a quiet clink and nods slowly

I’ve read Tim’s Week 33 lesson on “What Is Worship?” and this one is a bit more careful than some of the others. He actually gets a few things right on the surface.
What’s good about it
He’s correct that worship is not just music or an emotional high. Abraham’s “worship” in Genesis 22 was an act of costly obedience. True worship involves spirit and truth (John 4). Music is a beautiful expression, but it isn’t the whole of it. Fair enough. Many modern churches could stand to hear that.
Where the familiar problem appears
Even in this softer lesson, Tim still steers everything back into his usual channel. Notice the key words he keeps circling:

  • Obedience 
  • Surrender 
  • Covenant 
  • Truth 
  • Walking in His ways
In every previous Foundations lesson, those words have meant the same thing: keeping the Torah — the Sabbath, the feasts, the dietary laws, the whole system. So when he defines worship as “a life surrendered to Yahuah… grounded in truth… expressed in obedience,” what he really means is a life ordered around Torah observance.That’s the quiet redefinition again.
What’s missing
There is almost no focus on the New Testament center of Christian worship: the finished work of Christ. In the New Covenant, true worship is centered on the Lamb who was slain (Revelation 5). We worship the Father through the Son, in the power of the Holy Spirit. The cross is the great act of worship that makes all our worship acceptable. Tim never really lands there. He lands on obedience.

Paul’s teaching in Romans 12:1 is clearer: presenting our bodies as a living sacrifice is our spiritual worship — and that flows out of the mercies of God shown in the gospel (the whole argument of Romans 1–11). Tim flips the order. Obedience becomes the main thing; the gospel becomes background.
Father Ted’s Plain Verdict
This lesson is less aggressive than some of the earlier ones, but the foundation is still the same. Worship is being quietly redefined as covenant loyalty expressed through law-keeping. Christ is present, but He’s not allowed to be the full and final center.

True Christian worship is not first about how carefully we keep the old system. It is about coming to the Father through the Son, by the Spirit, resting in the finished work of the cross, and then living out of that grace.Tim keeps making obedience the engine.

The New Testament makes the gospel the engine, and obedience the fruit.Down with this sort of thing, lad — even when it comes dressed in reasonable clothes.The real question isn’t only “If music were taken away, would your life still be worship?”

The deeper question is: Is your worship centered on the finished work of Christ, or on your performance of the system?

...Right, I’m off to thank the Lord that we can worship in spirit and in truth because the veil has been torn and the way is open through the blood of Jesus

.Go on, go on, go on — have a cuppa. You keep spotting the same underlying current. Tim’s Foundations keep flowing toward the law. The real river of living water flows from the cross. Keep holding fast to that. It’s far better.


Father Ted he makes no mention of the eucharist in his lesson about worship!


Ah, Philippine Fails, me lad... sits up straight and puts the teacup down with a firm clink

You’re absolutely right. And it’s a very telling omission.

In a whole lesson on what worship is, Tim never once mentions the Lord’s Supper — the Eucharist, the Communion, the breaking of bread. Not a word.

For a Catholic priest (and for most of historic Christianity), that silence is deafening.
Why it matters
From the earliest days of the Church, the central act of Christian worship was not a song service or a lecture on obedience. It was the gathering of the people of God around the Table — remembering the Lord’s death until He comes, feeding on Christ by faith, and offering the one sacrifice of Christ present under the signs of bread and wine.Jesus Himself instituted it.

The apostles continued in it (Acts 2:42).

Paul gave careful instruction about it (1 Corinthians 11).

The early Church fathers treated it as the heart of Sunday worship.Yet in Tim’s definition of worship — faith, obedience, surrender, spirit and truth, music, heaven’s praise — the Table is completely absent.
What that reveals
This fits the larger pattern we’ve been watching for months. Tim’s system is heavily oriented around:

  • Returning to Torah 
  • Keeping the appointed times 
  • Covenant obedience 
  • Law as the main structure of the Christian life
In that framework, the sacraments (especially the Eucharist) don’t fit comfortably. The focus stays on what wedo — our obedience, our surrender, our keeping of the commandments — rather than on what Christ has done and continues to give us in the means of grace.

A worship that has no real place for the Lord’s Supper is a worship that has quietly shifted its center of gravity away from the cross and the finished work of Christ.
Father Ted’s Plain Take
You’re sharp to notice it, lad. A lesson on biblical worship that never mentions the very meal Jesus commanded us to keep in remembrance of Him is already telling us something important about the system behind it.

True Christian worship is not mainly about how carefully we perform the old covenant patterns. It is about coming to the Father through the Son, in the Spirit — and at the heart of that gathering is the Table where we proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.

Tim can talk about spirit and truth all day long. But if the Table Christ gave us is missing, something essential has been left out.

Down with this sort of thing.

Very careful now.

The Church has been gathered around that Table for two thousand years. Any “restoration” that has no real place for it is not restoring the faith of the apostles. It’s building something else.

...Right, I’m off to say a quiet prayer of thanksgiving for the gift of the Eucharist — the place where worship is not just talked about, but received.Go on, go on, go on — have a cuppa. You’re seeing the gaps clearly. Keep noticing what’s missing. Often that’s where the real theology shows itself.