Linda on Trump, Hitler and “I don… Biblicism Institute on >The Rule of 72 or Why a Mo… keruxreplies on Reply to William Finck, et al,… John Fisher on Reply to William Finck, et al,… keruxreplies on >"Deadbeat Dads"…
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2015
- October 2015
- March 2013
- February 2013
- October 2012
- April 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- July 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- December 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- April 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- April 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- May 2005
- September 2004
- August 2004
- 12 tribes of Israel
- 2nd Amendment
- abiotic fuel
- About the Bible
- alan jaroslovsky
- anti-white male
- anti-white propaganda
- baltic dry index
- bible numerics
- birth certificate
- black monopoly
- black on white crime
- blackmen as cool
- border patrol
- Building what?
- buy American
- carl klang
- cash for clunkers
- Charles Lindbergh
- child support
- Christian Identity
- christian maturity
- Christian Zionists
- Chuck Baldwin
- climate change hoax
- consensus reality
- conspiracy theories
- credit crisis
- cruxifixion mocking by jews
- culture. david sanborn
- deadbeat dad
- discrimination against whites
- doing god's work
- Domestic Militarization
- Dual Seedline Christian Identity
- Edomite jews
- Family Issues
- father's day
- federalist paper 28
- food shortages
- force majeure
- founding white fathers
- Frankfurt School
- free market
- Genesis 3:15
- George Bush murder
- greater depression
- Gulf oil gusher
- gun bans
- Henry Ford
- Hogan's Heroes
- holocaust hoax
- honor thy father
- how to lose friends
- how YouTube censors videos
- inalienable rights
- International Jewry
- Israeli lies
- ivan panin
- Jewish banking
- jewish control of media
- jewish psychopathology
- Jews and the Slave Trade
- Lloyd Blankfein
- lost sheep
- lost tribes of Israel
- martial law
- matthew 25
- muslims immigration
- New World Order
- North American Union
- nutrient density
- oil gusher
- oil gusher April 20
- organic food
- parable of the net
- police brutality
- police state
- Polish jew
- preventive detention
- question authority
- race mixing
- racial awareness
- rahm emanuel
- Revelation 16
- Revelation 8
- Rick Sanchez
- ron paul
- Rudyard Kipling
- Rule of 72
- Samuel Untermyer
- Satan worship
- saudi arabia
- scofield deception
- Scofield Reference Bible
- sheep and goats
- State licensing
- subtle manipulation
- teach the vietnamese
- the corrs
- Thomas Paine
- twelve tribes
- USS Liberty
- video mocks Yahshua
- water boarding
- when darkness falls
- white people
- Zionism Scofield Reference Bible
As of 01/20/2017, the exchange could be found here: https://youtu.be/FCQL-K85T3c
Mr. Don Preston said this in his video’s description:
Paul’s use of harvest imagery in 1 Corinthians 15 absolutely demands that we honor the Jewish concepts of the harvest- taken from Torah- as well as what the rest of the NT has to say about that end of the age harvest. When we do, it is undeniably true that the resurrection at the end of the age- the harvest- was truly imminent. An examination of John the Bapitzer, as Elijah makes the point very powerfully– and irrefutably!
My initial response is this:
” …. absolutely demands that we honor the Jewish concepts of the harvest …”
The Israelites were not jewish. The jews descend from Esau/Edom not Judah. They tell you that themselves.
“A brief History of the Terms for Jew” in the 1980 Jewish Almanac is the following: “STRICTLY SPEAKING IT IS INCORRECT TO CALL AN ANCIENT ISRAELITE A ‘ JEW’ OR TO CALL A CONTEMPORARY JEW AN ISRAELITE OR A HEBREW.” (1980 Jewish Almanac, p. 3).
Your entire teaching is based upon a false premise.
This follower of Mr. Preston replied:
With all respect Charles, if the 1st century (the context of Don’s presentation) Israelites were not Jewish, should you not be quoting from a first century source to corroborate your assertion, rather than a 20th century source?
This fellow Kevin replied:
+David Morsillo Amen and Amen
Give us your evidence that the Israelites were jewish. Any date will suffice.
Notice: no reply from Kevin. Most “christians” don’t read much less study Scripture, they simply listen to “leaders” like Mr. Preston, and if the teaching sounds reasonable, and they agree with it, they are, as they say, “good to go” with their teacher’s teaching. The blind leading the blind, and we know where they both end up, in the ditch of error.
I am well aware of when the term “Jew” came into usage. I am using it in its most well understood way. My premise is not wrong when taking that into consideration. Jesus himself “Salvation is of the Jews” so, I am on pretty safe ground in my usage of the term.
Sorry, Mr. Preston, but you might want to check the Greek. You do know the New Testament wasn’t written in English, don’t you? You’re reading an English mis-translation from the Greek. If you check you’ll find that phrase reads. “Salvation is of the Judaeans.” You do know there is a huge difference between “jews” and Judaeans, don’t you?
You might also want to check the 1560 version of the Geneva bible and figure out why you won’t find the word “jew” used.
Do you know it is admitted by many Scripture scholars that there are thousands of mistakes, errors, omissions and mis-translations in the KJV and many more in later versions of Scripture? Robert Young of Young’s Analytical Concordance being one of those scholars. You’d be well-advised to check and then double check very carefully whatever translation you are using so as not to be misled.
I visited your channel hoping to learn from you and that is when I discovered your mistake in thinking the Israelites were/are the jews. On that false premise your entire house will not be plumb, level or square.
Finally, do you think you can learn from others, or do you already have Scripture all figured out?
(CF:Let’s see if Mr. Preston thinks he can learn from others, shall we?)
I am very well aware of the Greek of John 4:22. You do not really believe that Jesus was saying that salvation was of “Judea” do you? How does that work?
When one examines the use of “Ioudaiown” in the NT it may indeed sometimes refer to “Judeans” or, it may also refer to those following the “Jewish religion” (CF: falsely) or, it may indeed refer to people that were descended from Abraham, (CF: again, false. Abraham was not a Judaean, neither was Isaac, and neither was Jacob/Israel, as none ever resided in Judea, nor where they descendants of Judah.) and now, that term, which had been in use for centuries, was (CF: does Preston mean is?) being used inclusively of Abraham’s seed.
I am more than aware of many of the shortcomings of the KJV– and not a defender of the KJV only view by any means. Not sure why you could make this an issue. (CF: I make it an issue because every translation has errors, mistakes, omissions and outright deception, a point Mr. Preston completely ignores, as evidenced by his following statements.)
BTW, I normally use the NKJV, which is a greatly improved translation. (CF:see what I mean?)
Now, I am more than happy to learn. I make no claim to know it all. But, (CF: what’s that saying, “When you use the word But, that oftens means we can disregard everything said before you used the word “But.”) you have built your house on a flimsy linguistic foundation that does not consider carefully the range of meanings that Ioudaiown can and does have in the NT.(CF: It is Mr. Preston who is failing to consider the range of meanings the word Ioudaios not, Ioudaiown as Mr. Preston uses the word, has, not me.)
And let me remind you that committee translation after committee translation, of men that I am assuming know more about the Greek than you or me almost invariably translate Ioudaiown as “Jews” in John 4:22. In fact, I have not found a committe (sic) translation that renders it otherwise.
My question to you is, are you willing to learn as well, or do you think you already have the scriptures figured out?
“You do not really believe that Jesus was saying that salvation was of “Judea” do you?” I most certainly do. Jesus Christ, the Kinsman Redeemer, (look up what a Kinsman is – you can’t redeem something that you have no prior claim to) said Himself twice, “I have not come but for the lost (dispersed) sheep of the house / descendants / offspring of Jacob/Israel.” His words, not mine.Yeah, I know, His words won’t fit with your paradigm so you’ll find a way to dismiss them, just like the Roman Catholics, with their universalism.
As for your “committee after committee,” that is nothing more than an appeal to authority added to an appeal to popularity, both logical fallacies. I have used the Scofield Reference Bible all life, put together by a committee of “Greek and Bible scholars” and the footnotes are filled with mistakes, lies and outright deception. I discuss that issue here: http://keruxreplies.blogspot.com/2009/12/scofield-reference-bible-deception.html here: http://keruxreplies.blogspot.com/2011/05/scofields-false-teaching-part-1.html and here: http://keruxreplies.blogspot.com/2009/01/ever-wonder-why-christian-zionism-has.html
I also discuss the fact that neither Abraham or Moses, or any of the other Israelites were jews, here: http://keruxreplies.blogspot.com/2008/09/was-abraham-or-moses-jew.html
It’s the Spirit of Yahweh that leads us unto all truth, not committees of fallible men with an agenda.
“it may also refer to those following the “Jewish religion”. The “jewish religion” is the tradition of the elders, as described in Scripture, and condemned by Christ Himself. These “traditions of men” were devised by the Edomite jews while they were in Babylon and are now known as the Talmud. You’re saying Jesus changed his mind and the “jewish religion” is for us Israelites?
“that term, which had been in use for centuries, was being used inclusively of Abraham’s seed.” Is a logical fallacy – appeal to tradition. Appeal to Tradition is a fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that something is better or correct simply because it is older, traditional, or “always has been done.” This sort of “reasoning” has the following form: X is old or traditional Therefore X is correct or better.
So far, in our discussion, you’ve used at least three logical fallacies. Not a great way for a self-appointed teacher to defend his views, is it? Like I said, are you willing to learn, or do you think you’ve got things all figured out? If you do, I’ll not waste my time here any longer.
I was not appealing solely to tradition. I also– if you would have read my comments more carefully– demonstrated that in the NT that is a range of meanings and applications for the word. Now, I have noted that virtually committee translations disagree with you– but you have ignored this. Unless you are qualified to counter the world’s linguistic scholars, I am confident in my use of the term, especially when I find it confirmed in scripture. Let me observe very quickly that Paul said he was a “Jew, (Iodaios) born in Cilicia”. That rather effectively negates your claims. Likewise, Apollos was a Jew, born in Alexandria. We have other examples of this.
(CF: Notice how Mr. Preston avoids four issues I brought up? 1) Kinsman Redeemer, 2)”I have not come but for the lost (dispersed) sheep of the house / descendants / offspring of Jacob/Israel.” 3)”You’re saying Jesus changed his mind and the “jewish religion” is for us Israelites? And 4)”You might also want to check the 1560 version of the Geneva bible and figure out why you won’t find the word “jew” used.).
I did read you comment(s) carefully. Did you read mine? “Paul said he was a “Jew, (Iodaios) born in Cilicia”.
No. Paul did not say he was a jew. He said he was a Judaean. BlueLetterBible, Strong’s G2453. Ἰουδαῖος Ioudaîos, ee-oo-dah’-yos; from G2448 (in the sense of G2455 as a country); Judæan, i.e. belonging to Jehudah Strong’s G2448 – Iouda the fourth son of the patriarch Jacobthe tribe that were the offspring of Judah.
You’re assuming Jehudah is the same as jew, aren’t you? Where’s your evidence, other than your appeals to authority, appeals to tradition, appeals to popularity?
The jews are not Judah. Jews descend from Esau. That is why Christ told the Edomites in John 8:33 “I know that ye are Abraham’s seed” offspring – descendants – but through Cain/Esau, not Jacob/Israel.
Second witness? John 8:44 “Ye (the Edomite jews) are of your father the devil ….” Through Cain, the first murderer.
Third witness? 1 John 2: 18 “…now there are many antichrists. They went out from us – us Judaeans- but they were not of us (Judaeans).” The antichrists are the jews you claim Paul was one of. Absurd.
Fourth witness? Rev. 2:9, 3:9.
Bring your best evidence here supporting your view that the jews are Judah. Don’t confuse the issue. Your best piece.
Let’s see, Paul said he was a “Jew” born in Cilicia- in Tarsus. Apollos was a “Jew” born in Egypt. (CF: this is Mr. Prestons “best piece?”And yet, you claim that they were Judeans. Sorry, that argument is not very convincing. It violates everything that the Bible says– they were not Judeans, they were of Cilicia and Egypt. (CF: Preston again ignores his very own statement:”demonstrated that in the NT that is a range of meanings and applications for the word.” Apparently, Mr. Preston doesn’t even read his own comments and he most certainly chooses the meaning that best fits his preconceived ideas, while ignoring contrary usage.)
BTW, your appeal to Revelation 2:9 / 3:9 reveals the fallacy of your paradigm. They claimed to be “Jews.”
Now, per your definitions, these people were claiming to be Judeans, but Jesus called them liars. That means that they did not even know their own “nationality” or “homeland!”
Did Paul not know he was a Judean, instead of claiming he was born in Cilicia? What was wrong with him? Was Luke wrong in claiming that Apollos was a Jew born in Egypt, and not Judea?
In Acts 11:19f- Paul and Barnabas went to “Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch, ” preaching, but, they preached “to none but the Jews (sic Judaeans) only.” Now, it is kinda hard to preach to Judeans who lived in these “non-Judean” geographical regions. They were preaching to those practicing the Jewish religion, (CF:no, they were preachingto fellow Judaeans) not to people who lived in Judea. The same is found through Acts. For your view to be correct, then every single mention of people that lived in Asia, Achaia, Macedonia, Corinth, etc.- had to have originally lived in Judea and migrated to all of those places.
However, even that will not work when Paul said he was a Jew (sic Judaean) born in Cilicia! This makes no sense at all. You are grasping at presuppositional straws.
I notice that all you have done is to scoff at my reference to virtually committee translations, as if they have no bearing on the issue. You chide me for appealing to authorities, but then, you turn around and appeal to the (very questionable) Strong’s Greek Lexicon as if it is an authority, and you have cited other “authorities.” This is a somewhat hypocritical argument. It is wrong for Preston to cite scholarship, but, it is powerful when you do so. I have given you the scriptural evidence. You have made some distorted claims. BTW, I am really curious about your claim that Jews were descended from Esau. What is your “proof” for this? John 8:44 says nothing to support your claim. The research I have done on this issue in the past says that the “Jews” were from Judah, so your denial of this is interesting, but, not very convincing. It is a presuppositional claim, for which I did not see any evidence.
BTW, let me add, that the Jews themselves claim that the term “Jew” was tied to Judah– Not Esau.
“Bring your best evidence here supporting your view that the jews are Judah. Don’t confuse the issue. Your best piece.” You purposely post a lot of male cow dung to confuse your “followers” don’t you? If you can’t convince them with logic, baffle them with male cow dung, that is, obfuscation, is obviously your approach.
“The research I have done on this issue in the past says that the “Jews” were from Judah, so your denial of this is interesting, but, not very convincing. I asked you to bring that very evidence here. You refuse to perform that simple straight forward request. Why is that? Is it because you have no evidence? Methinks so, in fact I know so. You have nothing but appeal to authority, popularity and tradition. All logical fallacies.
Of course my evidence is not very convincing to you: you’d have to admit your error if you admitted the evidence refutes your long held teaching. Yahweh often commands us to “repent.” Re-pent means to re-think our thoughts and actions and then turn in the new direction our re-thinking dictates. You are refusing to do just that. You may have most of your audience fooled, but not this lifelong student of Scripture. I’m done here and leave you with this: “Be not many teachers, my brethren, knowing that we shall receive greater judgment.: James 3:1.
Your using the jews claim that they are the jews of Judah is like quoting a murderer saying “I didn’t murder the victim” as evidence he didn’t commit the crime. Your thinking is illogical.
And no they don’t. (the Jews themselves claim that the term “Jew” was tied to Judah– ) Did you even read my previous comment? “A brief History of the Terms for Jew” in the 1980 Jewish Almanac is the following: “STRICTLY SPEAKING IT IS INCORRECT TO CALL AN ANCIENT ISRAELITE A ‘ JEW’ OR TO CALL A CONTEMPORARY JEW AN ISRAELITE OR A HEBREW.” (1980 Jewish Almanac, p. 3).
As for this: “Now, it is kinda hard to preach to Judeans who lived in these “non-Judean” geographical regions.” That’s exactly what Paul’s mission was: to bring the gospel to the dispersed Israelites, the scattered sheep of the lost house of Israel.
“I have other sheep not of this fold; them also I must bring.” John 10:16. You do know some Israelites left Egypt before the Exodus with Moses, don’t you? These are the Israelites that “have not the law.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFKUqjxe5fQ
Also, other Israelites migrated away from Palestine after the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities. “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the elect sojourners of the dispersion scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithyia.”I Peter 1:1.
James: ” … to the twelve tribes scattered abroad.” 1:1.
Paul: ” ….unto the churches (plural) of Galatia.” “to all that be in Rome.”
Your knowledge of Scripture may be a mile wide, but it’s only an inch deep.
I am an American. I lived in many foreign nations. Was I not still an American even though I lived in those nations?
You’ve got what I call “pretzel theology:” all twisted up.
You go on though, sitting there with all those books behind you, sipping your coffee, acting as if you know what you’re taking about. And you’re what I refer to as a “flat stone teacher.” You skip over passages of Scripture that contradict your teaching and thus end up with pretzel theology.
As for your preterist views, I can refute those with one verse: Revelation 1:19. Revelation was written somewhere around 90 A.D. The destruction of Jerusalem occurred in 70 A.D. Read the verse, do the math. I’m outta here and leave you to your false teachings.
“Let’s see, Paul said he was a “Jew” born in Cilicia- in Tarsus. Apollos was a “Jew” born in Egypt. And yet, you claim that they were Judeans. Sorry, that argument is not very convincing.It violates everything that the Bible says– they were not Judeans, they were of Cilicia and Egypt.”
Man oh man. How does anyone take what you teach serious?
I am an Israelite / Caucasian. I was born in Grosse Pointe, Michigan, USA. Now, am I “of Michigan?” like you say, or am I an Israelite / Caucasian born in Grosse Pointe, a city in Michigan? Paul said, to fellow Israelites, “I am a man (who is) a Judaean of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia.” Paul and Appollos were Judaeans – of Judah – born in Tarsus in Cilicia and Egypt respectfully.
You don’t see that obviously, which might explain why you don’t see so many other Scriptural facts. “Did Paul not know he was a Judean, instead of claiming he was born in Cilicia? What was wrong with him?”
The question is, what is wrong with you? Paul said he was “of the stock of Israel, (that is, an Israelite) of the tribe of Benjamin.” Phil. 3:5. The men in Acts 21-22 were fellow Israelite / Hebrews. See verse 22:2: “When they heard that he spoke to them in the Hebrew tongue, they kept the more quiet.” Paul was making the point that he was one of them, a fellow Israelite and had a message for them. The gospel. Paul was not speaking to jews. He was speaking to Israelites. verse 22:21 Paul tells us the Lord told Paul, “I will send thee far from here unto the Gentiles nations, the dispersed Israelites.”
You need to stop taking verses out of context, you’re a flat stone teacher. Skipping over passages that contradict your strongly held erroneous views.
“you turn around and appeal to the (very questionable) Strong’s Greek Lexicon as if it is an authority, and you have cited other “authorities.”
I was keeping it simple using only Strong’s. Do you care to refute Strong’s definition of the Greek words? re: your ((very questionable). If so, what other authority would you prefer? Liddell-Scott?
Further, I back up my arguments with Scripture, providing not just one witness, but several. You?
“What is your “proof” for this? John 8:44 says nothing to support your claim.” Sure it does. Can you think critically? Jesus says “I know Abraham is your father.” And “ye are of your father the devil.” If Jesus is speaking to fellow “jews” then he is saying that he himself, as a descendant of Abraham, (Matthew 1:1), is also of the devil. The word “of” is important, it means descendant of. See the genealogies. Eg., Luke 3 “of Heli, of Matthat, of Levi, etc. But since, the “jews” descend from Esau, not Jacob/Israel, my assertions holds.
You have to refute, instead of just disagreeing.
You don’t know your bible very well, do you?
“I will bless them that bless thee. And curse him that curses thee.” Genesis 12:3
(Note: the (((jews))), despite the repeated lies of heretic John Hagee and the likes of Pat Robertson, et al, are not the Israelites of the Old or New Testaments. They (((jews))) tell you this fact themselves: “A brief History of the Terms for Jew” in the 1980 Jewish Almanac is the following: “STRICTLY SPEAKING IT IS INCORRECT TO CALL AN ANCIENT ISRAELITE A ‘ JEW’ OR TO CALL A CONTEMPORARY JEW AN ISRAELITE OR A HEBREW.” (1980 Jewish Almanac, p. 3). And The Outline of History:. H. G. Wells, “It is highly probable that the bulk of the Jew’s ancestors ‘never’ lived in Palestine ‘at all,’ which witnesses the power of historical assertion over fact.”)
“It has invariably fared ill with the people who have persecuted the jew – well with those who have protected him. For a nation to commit the sin of anti-Semitism brings inevitable judgment.”Scofield Reference Bible, footnote 3, (Genesis 12:3) page 19, Scofield Reference Bible, 1967 Edition. (See Scofield Bible Deception and https://keruxreplies.wordpress.com/2011/05/14/scofields-false-teaching-in-matthew-25/ this blog.)
Your manufacturing technology was transferred to China, Mexico and other nations and except for a few key industries, like aircraft, (who would fly in a Boeing 747, manufactured in say, India?) manufacturing has all but disappeared. Along with manufacturing, your jobs were transferred to other third world nations. What a blessing, eh?
Real unemployment is around 25%. http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts. If you’re one of the unemployed or underemployed, what a blessing, eh?
Jewish control of your fiat currency, as they create trillions of “dollars” out of thin air to bail out their (((Wall Street Bankster))) buddies, and buy out real tangible assets, assets you create with your hard work and ingenuity, has eroded the purchasing power of the “money” you use to purchase the necessities of life. What a blessing, eh?
You’re $20 trillion in debt to the jewish bankers and foreign peoples, a debt that can never be – nor should be – repaid. How’s it feel knowing not only are you a debt slave, but so are your children, your grandchildren and most likely your grandchildren’s children? What a blessing, eh?
Your taxes are paying for wars for Israel, wars fought on false pretense, (remember those non-existent “weapons of mass destruction” wars fought with your blood, sweat, tears and your lives, not Israel’s: they get you to fight their was for them. If that wasn’t bad enough, war is very, very profitable for your politicians and other members of the Elite, and the corporations they own stock in. What a blessing, eh?
Your social security check doesn’t purchase near as much when the government doles back out your “benefits” to as it did when you were forced to pay into a system, a system that federal government employees do not use. What a blessing, eh?
Your skies are being polluted with geoengineering (no, those are not contrails Senator Testor) The nanoparticles being sprayed continuously over your and your families’ heads accumulate in your body, causing disease, misery and eventually death. What a blessing, eh?
Autism, dementia, drug use, alcoholism, mental health problems and other health related issues are at all time highs. Growing chronic diseases in the US is now in crisis mode.
Your once mostly Caucasian nation is now a divided country filling up with non-Caucasian third-world refuse “refugees” that you never got to vote on in the first instance and have no choice now but to accept. Refugee Resettlement Watch. What a blessing, eh?
Your borders are wide open and illegal immigrants are invading your country by the thousands, maybe the hundreds of thousands, yearly, taking your jobs, overloading your failing health care system, living on welfare and social security, while you pay for their Section 8 housing. What a blessing, eh?
An estimated 50 million individuals rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP. (Don’t you love the names they give these programs that you working Americans pay for?) What a blessing, eh?
In short, your once great Christian Anglo-Saxon Caucasian nation, has now become a third world country.
Seems to this writer, based upon empirical evidence, Americans have been cursed, rather than blessed. What think you?
Far too many people’s thinking and thus their opinions are nothing more than male cow dung.
Everything they think they know was programmed into them by the “Chosen Ones.” To paraphrase a famous quote: “Your opinion is only as good as your information.” Many people who think they are “educated” formed their understanding of the world around them through Talmudvision, Hollywood movies and other sources controlled by those who want the rest of us to see the world how they want us to see it.
We’ve had our perceptions managed all our lives. Many refuse (pun intended) to give up the male cow dung they call knowledge.
Burn that shit.
Trump is being compared to Hitler.
“You’re increasingly being compared to Hitler. Doesn’t that give you any pause at all?” ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos asked the Republican poll leader on “Good Morning America,” displaying an image of the Philadelphia Daily News’ punning Tuesday front-page headline “The New Furor.” Trump not bothered by comparisons to Hitler
“No, what I’m doing (ban Muslims from entering the United States) is no different from FDR.” Donald Trump December 8, 2015. (It should be noted FDR was a jew.)
Watching Trump and the response of mostly White supporters gives us a glimpse of what it might have been like in Germany in the 1930s. We Whites face many of the same problems the once proud Germans did then, brought upon us by the same group of criminals running and ruining our once White great nation, (a nation founded by Whites, I might add).
Trump has called out Israel for funding terrorism in the ME w/o naming them by name, a brilliant tactic, thus avoiding the knee-jerk antisemite canard.
Gotta love it when Trump was told he was being compared to Hitler. His reply? “I don’t care.”
Whites who love their country and who are sick and tired of what these criminal dual-citizen Israeli jews have done to destroy it should have the same attitude: “I don’t care if you call me an antisemite, an “evil Nazi” a “racist” or a “bigot.”
Facts are facts and the jews have destroyed the United States with their usury, fiat currency, debt, multiculturalism, pornography, propaganda, lies, deceit, entertaining diversions, the same way they destroyed Germany.” (See “Jewish Domination of Weimar Germany” by Eckart Verlog).
We Christians need to speak our minds and lose our “fear of the jews” . (John 7:13).
Solzhenitsyn, in Gulag Archipelago, wrote:
In 1927, when submissiveness had not yet softened our brains to such a degree, two Chekists tried to arrest a woman on Serpukhov Square during the day. She grabbed hold of the stanchion of the streetlamp, refusing to submit. A crowd gathered …. (Passers-by didn’t just all close their eyes and hurry by!) The quick young men immediately became flustered. They can’t work in the public eye. They got into their car and fled.” …. Instead not one sound comes from your parched lips and the passing crowd naively believes that you and your executioners are friends out for a stroll.
I myself often had the chance to cry out. (Page 15, 16)
You, yes YOU, still have a chance to have an “I don’t care” attitude and cry out, against the jew and what they are doing to the United States (and Europe).
Use your voice, and your God given right to speak your mind, before it is too late and you regret you did not take the opportunity to speak up and end-up dead, just like the 65 million Russians did.
Watching The Greatest Story Never Told will help you get the “I don’t care” attitude.
This is the kind of torture you might be subject to by not speaking out now:
*** Warning: Even Trump may be under the jewish thumb.
If you have not read “Reply to William Finck, et al, Round Earth Roundtable Discussion, Part I,” you can do so here. In Part I, I went through the podcast quoting Finck’s own words and replied.
Here in Part II, for the sake of time, both yours and mine, I’m just going to pick out a few of the statements made by Finck, and others, and reply to those selected statements only.
The following is only some of the highlights of the recording. The first statements I’ve chosen to comment on in this missive are found about 16 mins in: Finck says “…..somebody (is) here with me to make some more “technical comments to show that we do have mathematics to demonstrate Eric Dubay is a liar.”
“Somebody” goes on, allegedly demonstrating through math, using calculations, how Dubay, (and through implication, all round globe deniers), is lying and deceiving a “whole lot of people on the internet.”
One argument, and take a listen to follow along starting at 16 mins in, looking at a distance of 20 miles as a distance “which is a reasonably good visibility on a, on ah, on on the …. within some days.” “The drop off at the end of the 20 miles would be 267 feet of curvature. And, if we take that 267 feet at the end of that excursion, looking at that, ah, based upon that particular accuracy there, I would have to have a perception in my eyesight of better than .25 percent. That alone is probably pretty ludicrous to assume that at the extent over a 20 mile region if I’m standing in a specific spot, that I would actually be able to detect a curvature at .25 percent and that’s assuming that 267 feet of curvature.”
At this point Finck interjects, “Your eye would have to be as accurate as a laser level.”
Somebody replies, “Yes, that is consistent.”
Are these two really making these “arguments”? This is one of the “technical comments” that demonstrate the mathematics” showing Dubay is a liar?
Somebody just tossed out a logical fallacy known as a red herring. Other names for these bogus arguments are smokescreen, and wild goose chase. The issue under discussion is the curvature of the earth, not the ability of the human eye to accurately detect the earth’s alleged curvature at 20 miles distance.
Nice try guys.
The naked eye can be aided by binoculars and telescopes camera lenses. They can and do detect curvature or more accurately, the lack of curvature, in the earth’s surface at 20 miles and further, much further.
Finck provided the answer himself: “Your eye would have to be as accurate as a laser level.”
Yes, indeed. Here’s a video of a young fellow and his wife that got off their asses and actually went out to test the hypothesis that the earth has curvature. Flat Earth vs. The Globe Laser Test Flat Earth Experiment – Hypothesis
Somebody goes on to use the assumed radius of the round earth as 4000 miles, in another of his calculations to “prove” round earth deniers wrong.
Again, nice try.
The issue under discussion is whether the earth is round, like a ball or a level circle.
One can’t take for granted assumptions held by one view, in this case, a round earth with a radius of 4000 miles, to be used as evidence to prove anything. The “argument” is another logical fallacy – Circular Reasoning.
Somebody also assumes gravity is the answer.
Somebody then goes on to use a reference to the center of the earth again, once again assuming the earth is round. He also uses the assumption the earth’s center is the center of gravity of the earth, ignoring the fact that gravity is a theory, not proven fact. Finck can be heard in the background mocking gravity deniers, saying those who deny the theory of gravity should try jumping off a bridge.
Density answers many of the questions that usually get answered by the easy answer of “gravity.” The reason a person lands in the river below when jumping off a bridge is just as easily explained as the person’s body is denser than the air, so it falls through the air.
I would have thought that Hollywood making a propaganda movie titled, “Gravity” would have been a head’s up for someone as awake to the jew as Finck.
38:29 mins. into the podcast we get:
“Copernicus was not a jew.” Really? How does Finck know for sure?
There is reason to believe Copernicus was a jew, but which will not be gone into here. Whether or not Copernicus was a jew is debatable. Jew or not, here are a bunch of jews gushing over the Copernicus model.
The Jewish Reception of Copernician Thought.
“”New Heavens and a New Earth: The Jewish Reception of Copernican Thought,” Jeremy Brown describes the long history of the very jewish responses to Copernicus’ sun-centered system where the moving earth was viewed by many as conflicting with the tenants of the jewish (sic) faith. ”
The jews in the above video discuss the role jews played in getting Copernican thought accepted.
See also Fact-Less Copernican Model.
At 39:40 – 40:18 we hear: “This division has always been with us – whether the earth was a sphere or flat. You can’t take a couple lines from the Bible and insist the world is flat. None of the verses insist the Earth – when you look at the Hebrew – that the Earth is flat. And to say it is … you know, these clowns like Don Spears they think Jesus came down at West Minister Abbey in 1611 and gave men the Bible in English. So, whatever the King James says, that is dogma or doctrine. And, and the Hebrew and the Greek doesn’t support any of that. It does not insist on a flat Earth, it’s crazy.”
From my readings and listening to several if not dozens of posts and video podcasts related to the topic of the shape of the earth, I have not run across any “clowns” insisting from a few lines or verses of Scripture that the earth is flat. However, I have run across several verses that, if taken literally, essentially require the Earth be flat / level.
From The Flat Earth Bible, we find these verses:
“In Daniel 4:10-11: the king “saw a tree of great height at the centre of the earth…reaching with its top to the sky and visible to the earth’s farthest bounds.” If the earth were flat, a sufficiently tall tree would be visible to “the earth’s farthest bounds,” but this is impossible on a spherical earth. Likewise, in describing the temptation of Jesus by Satan, Matthew 4:8 says, “Once again, the devil took him to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world [cosmos] in their glory.” Obviously, this would be possible only if the earth were flat. The same is true of Revelation 1:7: “Behold, he is coming with the clouds! Every eye shall see him…”
Here is an comprehensive article discussing Scripture and the flat earth model.
Taken alone, these verses are not “proof” the Earth is flat. However, wouldn’t they provide the objective student studying the subject at least cause for pause?
With this, “these clowns, like Don Spears, they think Jesus came down at West Minister Abbey in 1611 and gave men the Bible in English. So, whatever the King James says, that is dogma or doctrine,” Finck uses a straw man argument.
As far as I can tell, Spears has not quoted the KJV to insist the earth is flat. Neither has anyone else that I have read or heard quoted a few KJV verses to insist the Earth is flat.
Other participants, along with Finck, continue their discussion coming to the conclusion that if someone is a jew, everything they say should be disregarded, because it can not be ascertained whether or not they are telling the truth, “about this or that.”
Whether or not a person is telling the truth, whether he is a jew or not, can often be ascertained by one doing his own research on the subject matter and not relying solely on what that person says. If we follow this logic, should we totally disregard Benjamin Freeman’s Willard Hotel speech, because he was a jew, revealing, for the first time, behind the scenes events involving WWI, the blackmailing of Woodrow Wilson and the US entry into WWI?; or the jew Samuel Untermeyer’s involvement in the appointment of the first Jew to the US Supreme Court, Louis Brandeis? And his involvement in the funding of the deceptive Scofield Reference Bible?
Further, Freedman provided information that was unknown to most before he “defected.” Should I throw out his book, “Facts Are Facts,” which I have quoted from to show skeptics the truth of many of the arguments I have made? Isn’t it more convincing to quote straight from the viper’s mouth facts that they may find impossible to believe unless they are spoken by a Jew?
Same thing applies to Bobby Fisher, a jew, who many consider a very intelligent man. “I equate the Jew and the devil together. To me, they are practically interchangeable.” Bobby Fischer on the Jews.”
Just because a jew supports subject, such as a non-spherical, non-spinning Earth, doesn’t mean the Earth is a spinning globe rotating around the sun.
Another straw man argument is brought up, that is, “how can anyone in Christian Identity follow someone who has a chink for a woman?” referring to Dubay. Who said anyone was “following” Dubay?
Can’t Finck and his following come up with non-strawmen logical fallacy arguments?
As for Don Spears “entertaining” “the jew Mark Sargent,” did it ever occur to any of these non-spherical Earth bashers, that perhaps Spears was unaware that Mark Sargent was a jew, a fact that has yet to be established? After all, Finck himself said that Spears has bad eyesight and because of this could not do his own podcast. Aren’t we as Christians, supposed to give our Christian Identity brethren the benefit of doubt? Has anyone asked Don Spears if he knew Sargent was a jew?
Maybe it is Finck himself who is the jew?
Is William Finck a Jew? Yes, by his own words, he is Jew.
Mike Delaney goes on about volunteering to fly down to the Antarctica and “talk to the man on the other side of the Petri dish,” another straw man argument. No Christian Identist I am aware of believes the Earth is a Petri dish. I certainly don’t.
Delaney also volunteers to “take photographs.”
Mike, how will you know for sure where you’ve landed? Think about it; you’re going to land on some rocky island somewhere with penguins and ice and sea water as far as the eye can see; how will you know where you are?
If you visit the Antarctica Post Office, are you at the edge of what the globalists call the continent of Antarctica situated at the bottom of the spherical earth, or are you at the edge of what the global earth deniers say is the outer 150′ high Ice Wall surrounding the oceans? You really won’t know, will you?
How will know for a certainty that you are where you are told you are? How can you verify that info?
Finck: “These flat-earthers pontificate about these stupid points they make on the internet endlessly and none of them have gotten off their asses and gone and taken some pictures. ” …… I want pictures of the ice wall.”
Well, here are some pictures of the Ice Wall. Unlike NASA photos, these images do not appear to have been computer generated or Photoshopped. They are the real thing.
Why can’t that Ice Wall be on the outer rim of a flat Earth?
The answer is of course it can.
It became increasingly more difficult and painful to continue listening as I played and rewound the podcast over and over to make sure I got the quotes accurate.
That’s it – I’ve wasted enough time already.
If I was Finck, I don’t think I’d be calling others clowns.
I’ll finish up with this quote attributed to Aristotle — ‘It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.’
For more on the subject of the firmament and the deception as found in the Scofield Reference bible, see Flat Earth Dr. Hugh Ross Avoids the Firmament of Genesis 1.
As a Christian Identity “adherent,” who has been and is studying the issue of whether the Earth is a sphere spinning around its axis at over 1000 mph at the equator and spinning around the sun at over 67,000 mph, I took exception to the ranting and raving I heard directed towards me and others like myself, found on the podcast titled, “Round Earth Roundtable,” at Christogenea.org which can be heard here. http://christogenea.org/podcasts/round-earth-roundtable.
See also – Busted – 2015 NASA Photo Fakery Revealed.
Disagreeing with much of what Mr. Finck, and other participants of the “round table discussion” said during this podcast, I find it necessary to reply to some of the statements made during the discussion for several reasons, reasons which will be discussed throughout this missive.
On the site where the podcast is available, are the statements:
“Is our planet Earth flat? Probably not.”
“Should Identity Christians care if the Earth is flat? Probably not.”
Probably not? Why is Finck hedging here? Is the Earth flat or isn’t it? Should we Identity Christians care if the Earth is flat? Again, he uses the word “probably.” Well, what is it? Probably not, maybe or yes we should?
“Identity Christians should keep themselves above and away from all of the fringe conspiracy theories that discredit our cause, distract us from what we should be doing, and drive people away from our core message, which is indeed true.”
Apparently, it is Finck who determines what is and what is not a “fringe conspiracy theory” that the rest of us should “keep ourselves above and away from.” As for me, I am not going to let Finck dictate to me what I can or cannot study. Neither am I going to let Finck decide for me what I should or should not be doing.
Here’s a written portion of Finck’s opinion about what and what does not have a place in Christian Identity found in his opening remarks:
“First, I want to talk about an issue that has come into Christian Identity circles …. and this issue has no place at all in Christian Identity: because no matter what the shape of the earth is, it has absolutely no bearing on the fate of our people. It has absolutely no bearing as to what is happening to Christians, and when I say Christians, I mean White Israelite Christians, on what is happening to Christians in the world today. It doesn’t matter if the earth is round, flat, square, if it looks like a Rubic’s Cube, if it looks like a baseball bat, IT DOES NOT MATTER. There are some things that Identity Christians, some arguments, some disputes, that are so stupid, and irrelevant, and disconnected to our reality, CI adherents should not get involved in them at all. And when the mainstream everyday people see you as a freaking quack, you’re never going to get the important components of your message across to them. We don’t give a damn if the earth is a pancake, a Petri dish, a basketball, We don’t care. If we want to get the truth of our Christian Identity message over to people, we should stay away from the quackery.”
According to Finck, if “mainstream everyday people see you as a freaking quack,” we are never going to get the important aspects of our (Christian Identity) message across to them. Apparently, it is Finck’s opinion, (and it is important to note that it is nothing more than Finck’s opinion), that Christian Identity “adherents,” if we want to effectively get our message of racial Israelite Identity, as found in Scripture, out to everyday people, we should avoid being seen as “quacks” involved in “quackery.”
Technically, quackery is defined as “the methods and treatments used by unskillful doctors or by people who pretend to be doctors.” So, why Finck used the words “quack” and “quackery” to describe those of us interested in ascertaining the truth of the Earth Yahweh created for us to live upon, escapes me. Nevertheless, the point he seems to be trying to make is, we should avoid appearing as “quacks,” or “conspiracy theorists,” or “nut cases” to “everyday people” if we hope to reach them with our message.
Finck says we should appear to “mainstream everyday people” to be like they are, we should appear to others to be normal people who don’t involve ourselves at all in “stupid, and “irrelevant” issues “disconnected with our reality,” in order to get the Christian Identify message across to these same “mainstream everyday people.”
Fact is, many, especially Judeo-Christians (an oxymoron) consider me a heretic, a racist, a Nazi and a “freaking quack” because of my Christian racial Identity views. Does that mean I should drop my CI views?
Off the top of my head I can think of several issues we Identity Christians should then, using Finck’s “logic,” avoid at all costs if we do not want to be considered “quacks” by “mainstream everyday people:” Adolph Hitler and the “evil Nazis;” the holocaust hoax; the fact Israel pulled off 9/11, to name just a few. In the hopes of avoiding being labeled as “conspiracy theorists,” “tin foil hat wearers,” “nut cases” “lunatics” or “quacks,” shouldn’t we avoid being involved in any way with these issues too?
Further, I know I am considered by many “mainstream everyday people,” to be a “quack” for my speaking the truth about these named “Conspiracy Theories,” and yet I never once thought I should avoid speaking the truth about any subject whatsoever for fear of what others might think of me. Frankly, I don’t care what others think of me. I’m going to speak the truth, in love, about any subject I think Yahweh wants me to speak about, including a stationary non-spherical Earth, despite William Finck’s opinion to the contrary.
That said, there is a way, a means by which these subjects can be brought up with “mainstream everyday people.” One of those means is to start out by showing concern for the welfare and wellbeing of those we are trying to reach with our message. By doing so, others tend to be more open to our ideas and opinions once they get to know us and know we genuinely care about and for them. After all, it is first and foremost Christian Identity.
Having had significant personal interaction with Finck over a period of several months, I can attest to the fact Finck lacks even basic concern for others or their opinions. All one has to do is express an opinion that even slightly differs with his, and you’re immediately placed on Finck’s “Ass Hat Clown List,” which from all appearances, appears to be quite long. If your opinion differs with his, even slightly, your opinion is not only wrong, you’re a “clown,” and your opinion, because it differs from his, lacks any merit whatsoever.
The truth of this observation can be seen in his response to flat Earthers: nothing they say has any merit? Every single problem spherical Earth deniers point out concerning the globe theory we’ve been presented, unchallenged, all our lives, are without merit? After several months and hundreds of hours studying the spinning spherical Earth theory I accepted, unchallenged, all my life, I find this position not only ridiculous, but contrary to Scripture.
“Prove all things, hold fast to that which is good.” Prove “all things,” not just those things that “mainstream everyday people” find acceptable, including those things William Finck thinks we should not involve ourselves with.
“You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.” Not some of the truth, but “the truth,” sets us free. Sets us free from what? Certainly knowing the truth sets us free from what others think of us because of our opinion about certain subjects, including the shape of the Earth Yahweh created.
To even begin to delve into many “components of Christian Identity,” to use Finck’s terms, requires an open objective mind and critical thinking skills. Finck, in my view, has prematurely answered a selected list of the weakest arguments from a very limited number of spherical spinning Earth deniers, (really just a single “flat earther” – Dubay), before he has studied the matter sufficiently to develop an intelligent position supported by facts, as is clearly evident in his statements found in the roundtable discussion he hosted. This is folly and shame.
Should not Finck exhibit the very same unbiased open-mindedness in his approach to the flat earth subject that he expects others to use in their examination of the doctrines of Christian racial identity, Adolph Hitler, the holocaust, etc?
One does not have to accept every single teaching of every single Christian racial identity teacher or historical revisionist. One should and must examine all things taught by these teachers, use their God given critical thinking skills to vet out what is contrary, in their view, to Scripture, and hold onto what they prove for and to themselves, to be true. This includes William Finck’s teaching. Finck, in my view, is wrong in many of his views, the spinning, rotating spherical Earth being just one of many. Does that mean I reject everything Finck espouses? No.
The idiom, “Throwing the baby out with the bath water” comes to mind.
Same principle applies to teaching concerning the shape of the Earth. Do I agree with everything everyone who has taught me concerning the Earth? No. My study of the subject showed me there are many flaws and problems with the spinning rotating spherical Earth position. That has led me to question what I thought I knew about the subject, just like I did when I studied other “conspiracy theories” like the assassination of JFK, the moon landing, the “evil Nazis,” Adolph Hitler, WWII, the alleged holocaust, 9/11, etc.
Finck isn’t suggesting that we’ve been lied to about all those other “conspiracy theories,” by the Jewish controlled media, but we were told the truth concerning the Earth we live on, is he?
Something smells fishy here.
One biblical subject found in Genesis 1 has always been a mystery to me: how does the firmament mentioned in verse 6 fit in with the Earth as a spinning globe theory? In my opinion, the spinning rotating Earth theory does not work with a firmament. However, in the stationary flat Earth model, the firmament makes perfect sense.
Keep in mind, that up until 500 years ago, this was the model accepted by all “mainstream everyday people,” many of whom were very scientific, better educated and more intelligent in many ways than many of the so-called Scientists, the High Priests of the Religion of Science, of our day. For one thing, they possessed common sense, something quite lacking in many people I know today. Does it feel to you like you’re spinning around at several hundred miles per hour? Does the moon look like its 242,000 miles away? (Edit: Link to a video showing clouds moving behind the moon. The moon would have to be much closer than we’ve been told, and accepted all these years to have clouds moving behind it. A closer moon makes perfect sense – inside a firmament). The Science Priests call what they believe Science and the followers of Science believe what they are told. That is not Science; that is faith, a belief system of the New Religion of the Age, Science.
Finck then goes on to attack Eric Dubay and his PDF “200 Proofs the Earth is Not a Spinning Ball,” labeling Dubay a “race mixer,” a plausible (possible?) Jew, a straight clown and a liar.” I’m not going to defend Dubay, as I have had my run-in with him, being banned almost immediately from his forum, The International Flat Earth Research Society, for attempting to share the truth of Scripture related to the creation of the Earth.
A video/audio presentation of Dubay’s “200 Proofs” can be found Here. Check it out for yourself as to whether Dubay’s reasoning is “quackery.”
Further, I too discovered the book Finck mentions written by Carpenter.
However, Finck is mistaken when he states, “From what I can see, Carpenter is not even mentioned on Dubay’s website.” Carpenter’s book is mentioned here: http://ifers.boards.net/thread/28/100-proofs-earth-globe-ebook in a post dated Mar 3, 2015.
Eric Dubay isn’t the only person promoting flat Earth. If one wants to attack the merits of the non-spinning, non-rotating spherical Earth deniers’ ideas, why not chose those who have a less anti-Christian position like Jeran of Jeranism? Or the pro-Christian, pro-Scriptural positions of Rob Skiba?
Finck, attacking the “race-mixing possible Jew” Dubay and his “200 Proofs” as if his “proofs” are identical to all other flat Earther’s views, is disingenuous. Other proponents of the stationary level Earth theory have several if not dozens of legitimate arguments. Why didn’t Finck, et al, examine those other more relative and stronger points? Is it because Finck, et al, have already made up their closed minds? Hypocritical, is it not?
Finck then proceeds to attack Ernest Pierce, whom he refers to as “a supposed Christian Identity so-called pastor, the clown just showed up a couple of years ago,” who has made this “flat-Earth drivel” one of the centerpieces of his so-called ministry, which, in Finck’s opinion, all it does is discredit “real Identity Christians.”
I know nothing of Ernest Pierce, and am not here to defend him, but what if the flat Earth, with a firmament, is not “drivel,” as Finck claims? What if it turns out we don’t live on a spinning spherical heliocentric globe? What if, Yahweh forbid, Finck is wrong? Is Ernest Pierce still a “so-called pastor clown with a so-called ministry?”
Or is it Finck who is the clown with a so-called ministry?
As stated above, all one has to do is express an opinion that differs from Finck’s dogma, and one is a “clown,” a “lunatic” a “quack,” or worse.
Don Spears is the next victim of Finck’s junkyard dog like attack. He refers to Spears as “that Baptist ass-clown from south Alabama, who’s claiming to be an Identity Christian, and he’s really just fooling himself,” who, because of his “big ego and bad eyesight,” was prevented from doing his own video podcast on the subject of the flat Earth, and instead hooked up with Mark Sargent, whom Finck claims, “is a Jew who has infiltrated and is trying to co-opt the so-called flat Earth movement for his own design.”
Although one may disagree with Don Spear’s King James Only position, as I do, does that entitle one to publicly attack him as a “Baptist ass-clown from south Alabama, who’s claiming to be an Identity Christian, and he’s really just fooling himself,” and having a “big ego and bad eyesight” for reasons he had an interview with the alleged Jew, Mark Sargent? How is Finck’s typical attack-dog approach going help in reaching “mainstream everyday people” with the Christian Identity message, that Finck himself seems so concerned about?
Starting at about six minutes in, Finck continues his pro-spinning rotating heliocentric spherical Earth and anti-stationary flat geocentric firmament encased Earth rant with many unsubstantiated claims. For example, this “Mark Sargent character, who is a Jew, has “infiltrated the flat Earth movement and is trying to co-opt the flat Earth movement for his own designs.”
What evidence does Finck give in support of these allegations? Finck certainly does not provide any evidence for such an opinion, and that is all it is, his opinion. And this is just my opinion; maybe, just maybe, because of his big ego, Finck believes his opinions are more valid than anyone’s opinion on this subject and many other subjects, subjects he knows little about.
Finck continues giving his opinion: “One problem with some of these flat Earthers is this: “They latch onto many so-called conspiracy theories, which actually have credibility and they add ridiculous flat Earth and other equally ridiculous so-called conspiracies to them, which simply discredit everything they purport to profess. It is very plausible that they are doing this on purpose, so that, by associating flat-Earthers with holocaust revisionists, or those who are aware of and try to spread information about Jewish media control or about Christian Identity …. or about those who doubt the existence of dinosaurs or evolution or anything else, are thereby seen as flat Earthers, lunatics, to be discredited in the eyes of the general public.”
As for sharing flat Earth theory to the general public, I have found, through personal experience, unlike Finck, it is actually easier to discuss the opposing theories regarding the Earth, than it is to even bring up the subject of the holocaust, because when one does bring up the holocaust, the general public has been trained, (by the very same Jewish controlled media Finck refers to), to immediately label you as an “anti-semite,” a “holocaust denier,: “hateful,” or, and this may be the worst of all, a “Nazi.”
I find it easier to have a discussion with friends and acquaintances about the Earth and whether it is spinning or stationary, flat or a sphere, simply because when discussing these subjects, one can point out anomalies existing right in their world that gets them questioning their beliefs. And many, many more people are interested in the physical world around them affecting them daily, than they are about something, like the holocaust, that did – or didn’t – happen to the Jews over 70 years and they see as having no affect on them whatsoever.
Then, once they start questioning the view of the world they are standing on, their eyes and minds are more open to the idea that they have been lied to about many other things, including the true identity of the Israelites of Scripture and even the so-called holocaust. From this vantage point, it is easier to segue into “components” of Christian Identity doctrine, and or the truth of other so-called “conspiracy theories.”
From personal experience, the reality is exactly the opposite of Finck’s opinion.
“Christian Identists who promote flat earth, (that includes me) actually discredit Christian Identity; they think they are smart, but they are actually idiots.”
There it is again: if you don’t believe EXACTLY like I do, you discredit Christian Identity and are an “idiot.” If I am not mistaken, Finck just called me and those who think like I do regarding the non-spinning, non-rotating stationary flat firmament enclosed Earth, idiots.
The stationary flat Earth covered by a firmament is arguably the “Mother of all conspiracy theories.” If someone should start out by coming to the correct knowledge of this “Mother of all conspiracy theories,” how is calling them “quacks,” “lunatics” and “idiots” going to endear them to the message of the lesser “conspiracy theories,” like the Christian racial Identity message or the fact that Jesus was not a Jew or the “Jews are not God’s Chosen Ones”?
7:40 seconds into the podcast Finck states: “Eric Dubay is an absolute liar.” He then goes on to offer what he believes is evidence in support of his claim that Dubay lied and deceived others by responding to Dubay’s item #45. That “evidence” is the fact, that only took Finck “30 seconds” to discover, is that “Quantas Airways has a direct flight from Perth, Australia to Johannesburg, South Africa that is 11 hours and 30 minutes. You’ll find that South African Airlines has a direct flight that is 11 hours 30 minutes.” Well, if Finck would have spent more than 30 seconds investigating the subject, he perhaps might have discovered the actual truth of the matter.
Perhaps if Finck would have spent just a little more time examining this issue, like I did, he may have discovered those flights quite likely exist only on websites and not in reality.
Did Finck actually book a flight on those two airlines that say they have these flights? Can one actually take those flights, or are they merely listed to make people believe they can fly around the spherical Earth on a direct flight? Why would an airline, if they could actually fly directly between those two cities in 11 hours and 30 minutes, have the option of flying between the two cities on a flight that takes twice as long, consumes twice as much fuel and, quite likely, is more expensive? Why in the spherical spinning world would a passenger choose the more expensive longer flight, 10 hours longer, over the less expensive flight of shorter duration?
Does that make any business sense to you, for the airline or the passengers?
Did Finck take the time to find out if anyone else has actually taken those flights? With all the current attention given to the flat – globe Earth debate taking place, quite likely, if anyone has indeed taken those flights, one of the passengers or crew would have posted some information by now on the internet as to their validity? How does he know those flights are, in reality, actual flights? The answer is, of course, he did not research the matter fully and therefore does not know for a certainty that those flights actually take place. To use Finck’s words, “Do those listed flights actually exist? Probably not.”
In my view, that is pretty unstable grounds upon which to call someone a liar and a deceiver, but then again, Finck is quick to condemn anyone who disagrees with him.
One may also notice, rather than suggest that others take a look at Dubay’s “200 Proofs” or even Carpenter’s “100 Proofs” and decide for themselves the merits or demerits of those proofs, the listener is simply expected to take Finck’s word that the entire subject is “quackery” and anyone who entertains the idea we live on a flat stationary Earth is a “quack” and an “idiot.” Finck has spoken and there is nothing else to know about the subject.
Letting the leader think for the members is a characteristic of a cult following.
At about 16 minutes in, another unidentified speaker starts offering “proof” in rebuttal to some of Eric Dubay’s “200 Proofs.” I think it best to postpone any more of a Reply, until Part Two.
Meanwhile, I’ll be recovering from Finck calling me a “quack” and an “idiot.” Ha.
This conception of Earth, (found at Rob Skiba’s site here) rather than the spinning spherical Earth we’ve been fed all our lives, appears to me to be more like what is described in Scripture. Why shouldn’t Christian Identists study to learn more about this model of Yahweh’s Earth?
For more on the subject of the jewish deception found in the Scofield Reference Bible and how Dr. Hugh Ross, a Creation scientist is connected to this deception, see Flat Earth Dr. Hugh Ross Avoids the Firmament of Genesis 1.
 I Thes. 5:21.
 John 8:32.
 Proverbs 18:13.