So I bought his PDF book and just started skimming it. I must say that I'm incredibly disappointed. I skipped ahead to the Church Fathers, where Sungenis asserts that there's a Patristic consensus that the Earth is a sphere.
So his first proof text here is from St. Ambrose:
They ask us to concede to them that heaven turns on its
axis with a swift motion, while the sphere of the earth remains
motionless, so as to conclude that waters cannot stay above the
heavens, because the axis of heaven as it revolved would cause these to
flow off. They wish, in fact, that we grant them their premise and that
our reply be based on their beliefs.
Italics were from Sungenis.
Who that wishes to be honest does not recognize that St. Ambrose here is describing the position of his adversaries? It's impossible to tell from this whether he rejects some of it or all of it. But he describes these as
THEIR beliefs.
But then, what's more if you look at what he's
actually saying, and not focus on the mere presence of the world "sphere," St. Ambrose is talking about a sphere on which the WATERS rest (and his opponents claim would flow off if the heavens rotated). So this notion of "sphere" refers to the idea of the FIRMAMENT as being the surface of the sphere, on which the waters flow. It is not the surface of the earth, the inhabited land, that he describes as a sphere, but he's clearly talking about the firmament dome on top of which the waters above rest. So, what?, Dr. Sungenis, human beings are marine creatures that live admidst waters that are directly on top of the inhabit sphere of the earth?
How is St. Ambrose's description of a sphere on top of which the waters rest consistent with Sungenis' believe that the firmament is "space"? It doesn't.
This is a huge strike right out of the gate from just my initial random selection of where to start in his book.