Looks interesting, and I'll be sure to have a look.

I used to concede the Glober argument that the Church Fathers, for the most part, outside the "Antiochen" school, considered the earth to be a globe / ball, so I was reading through the section in Dr. Sungenis' book against FE about the Church Fathers, and I came to the opposite conclusion.  I can demonstrate where the Church Fathers held the exact opposite and Sungenis and others were reading the NASA ball into a description of a sphere that includes the firmament.  In one case Sungenis interprests "circle" as meaning sphere, that's how desperate they are, and in another the Father describes the earth as being a sphere ... with a plane creating a cross-section through it.  Hmmm.  What does that sound like other than a reference to the spherical enclosure of the world, i.e the firmament, with a slice through it that ends up being circular, and is a plane on which we live and walk.

Amazon have pulled the book over some silly administrative issue.

Of course they did. ...

The three distinct spots on the glass orb in Leonardo da Vinci's Salvator Mundi are widely believed to represent the constellation Leo. Others argue they represent stars in the Southern Cross (Crux), which gained attention through explorers' accounts in the early 16th century.

• Leo Theory: The three white dots are thought to represent the key stars in Leo—Regulus, Denebola, and Leonis—connecting to the lion's gaze.
• Southern Cross Theory: Some research suggests these dots depict the constellation Crux, potentially referencing discoveries mentioned in Amerigo Vespucci’s letters.
• Symbolism: The orb itself represents the celestial sphere of the heavens.

These interpretations add to the debated, mysterious nature of the orb in the painting.

So, if there are stars in the TOP of this globe Christ is holding, Dr. Sungenis ... how does this depict NASA's ball?  Last time I checked the Northern Hemisphere of the NASA ball did not have stars within it.

It's quite comical that the VERY COVER of this book is an epic fail.

Did Sungenis remove the stars from the original painting, using Photoshop or similar?

What a shill.

But yes, I've heard all the Catholics claim that this or that Church Father believed in the "globe", and in no case does their belief line up AT ALL with the NASA ball.

Has anyone even CLAIMED anything close to this? I mean, saying "the earth is a globe" is about as far from today's "NASA package" as the globe earth is from the flat earth. Let's not forget that virtually all atheists, and 100% of Scientism (false science) believers are globe believers. Once you embrace "flat earth", you're going to believe in God (or at least some god) who created the snow globe and everything inside and around it. But 0 flat earthers believe in abiogenesis. (life coming from non-life)

It's funny how many "scientists", "rationalists" and "science lovers" believe in abiogenesis. They talk about it like it's a thing. Have they never read about Louis Pasteur, who proved that life doesn't arise from non-life? His experiment with rotting meat, flies, and cheesecloth?

EVEN IF someone (say, a Church Father) wrote about the earth being "round", globe-believing Catholics would pounce on it and think that means the earth is a spinning ball. That is being read into it, because all of our minds are CHOCK FULL of propaganda on this topic from birth. In fact, the Fathers could simply say "earth" and instantly our minds would picture the Blue Marble. Again, because we have a serious bias, almost all of us, due to decades of intense propaganda. It would be a miracle if we DIDN'T have such a bias.

The only way I was able to break out was through 100% Reason. But even now, I have residual propaganda sloshing around in my own head. Instincts, tendencies, gut feelings, imagination -- you don't instantly lose all that. I experience a certain "comfort" or "normal feeling" when I think about the globe model, outer space, Star Trek Enterprise orbiting around a spinning ball "planet" -- even though the minute my rational mind engages, I can quickly and totally reject it as nonsense.

Not one single Church Father said the earth was round.
Not one.

I modified my post a bit. More of an "even if". More of a "Transeo" -- passing over it for now, "let's assume this is the case" for the sake of argument.