As a Christian Identity
adherent, who has 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.
Ironically, Finck uses a CGI of the round Earth put forth as an authentic image of the globe NASA want us to believe is the Earth. Not too difficult to fool Finck it seems.
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.”
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?
I know for a fact that 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, or that 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 more going on here than meets the eye.
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? 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.
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 Earth firmament encased 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 this allegation? 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;
because of his big ego, Finck believes his opinions are more valid than anyone
else’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 much 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 in 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 truth of
the matter 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 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 conspiracy theory,” 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?
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 might have discovered the actual truth of the
matter.
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 fight 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.
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.
Read More...
Summary only...
Posts
