P.I.D. Radio at Future Congress: Chris Pinto — The Patriotic Faith

Chris Pinto

Chris Pinto

THE TRUE purpose of the United States may not be what you think.  Documentary filmmaker Chris Pinto joined us at the Future Congress on Emerging Threats and Challenges in Branson, Missouri to discuss his research into America’s origins and the true faith of the founding fathers.

Don’t miss Noise of Thunder Radio, a daily webcast hosted by Chris.

Check out links to the news stories we discuss at the P.I.D. News page at Facebook.  Also, please visit the P.I.D. Radio Facebook page, and check out the great Christian podcasters at the Revelations Radio Network.

Click the arrow on the player below to listen now, or right-click (control-click if you have a Mac) the “download” link to save the mp3 file to your hard drive.

24 comments on “P.I.D. Radio at Future Congress: Chris Pinto — The Patriotic Faith

  1. Lisa Geron

    The fact that Chris Pinto has concluded that Catholicism itself is in error and that Catholics need to be led out of the Church by true Christians destroys his credibility over all. His bias will blind him and anyone who shares it.
    There have always been insidious forces within the faith – for example, the dark ones in the mountain with their idols and evil worship. That did not indicate that there were errors in the very religion and faith itself that those men pretended to have when they were in the light.
    There has alway been corruption in the Church, and that does not diminish the true practice of the faith, which is always found in individuals. Many Catholics are fully aware of the infiltrators and the geo-politicians and even the plain worldly who destroy and disfigure and damage from within. Sadly, I think most are not.
    This erroneous approach of Chris Pinto’s isn’t going to help them, either.
    The problem seems to be a lack of humility, knowledge, and wisdom.
    This is very disappointing.

  2. Paul Collins


    Pinto claims that the American Revolution was influenced by the Enlightenment (which is patently false) and then he claims the Catholic Church is behind it all. This is a contradiction he cannot reconcile because the Enlightenment was strongly anti-ecclesiastical and anti-Catholic. Pinto is such a historical illiterate that he doesn’t even recognize that fact. He needs to go back to school and take a class on the History of Western Civilization.

    He is clearly overmatched by the topic he is trying to tackle. But truth and honesty in research were obviously never his concern. Like most people who are part of the fundamentalist fringe, he wants to hate somebody. So he’ll misconstrue the facts and make things up out of thin air to justify that hatred.

    The Gilberts show their dedication to sophistry by consistently promoting this misfit in spite of the fact that they have been warned about him by people who have carefully done their homework.

  3. Darlene

    “His bias will blind him and anyone who shares it…This erroneous approach…The problem seems to be a lack of…knowledge, and wisdom.”

    “This is a contradiction he cannot reconcile because the Enlightenment was strongly anti-ecclesiastical and anti-Catholic…So he’ll misconstrue the facts and make things up out of thin air…people who have carefully done their homework.”

    I would like to see some point-for-point refutation rather than blanket statements. Always, and without exception, when I see people “disagree” with Pinto, I see blanket statements or personal comments. I have yet to see anyone intelligently refute any of the points made by Pinto.

    If there are those who “have done their homework”, I’d like to see the homework. I’ve done mine and find the same thing as Pinto. He’s been very intentional and careful to present facts, within their correct context. I’ve not seen any, ANY of his critics able to do the same.

    EVERY time I’ve asked for factual refutation of Pinto’s presented materials, I’ve encountered only anger. THAT is “very disappointing”.

  4. Paul Collins


    Consider the following:

    1. Pinto has presented the Albigensians and Cathars as keepers of the apostolic faith. These were Gnostic heresies, not Christians. For documentation refer to Last of Gnostics by Don Durrett.

    2. Pinto praises the Protestant Reformation and posits a Manichean opposition between the Protestants and Catholics. However, the Protestant Reformation, while Christian, was not lily white. Luther subscribed to nominalism, which foreshadowed radical empiricism. This led to a radical division between what is believed and what is quantifiable. Scientism would emerge from this, leading to the concept of a scientific dictatorship. For more, check out my brothers article at:

    3. Voltaire, a philosophe and leading light of the Enlightenment, consistently attacked the Catholic Church in his writings. Pinto conveniently overlooks that fact. You can see that by simply reading what the man wrote or at his wikipedia page:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltaire

    4. Enlightenment thinker Denis Diderot’s Encyclopedie, considered the Enlightenment’s bible, praised the Protestant Reformation. Unfortunately, the Protestants had been duped by anti-Christian forces into weakening the political power of the Catholic Church and splitting Christendom. See Encyclopedie’s wikipedia entry at:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie

    And, again, read my brother’s article listed above.

    5. I can’t get impressed by Pinto’s “presented materials.” Have you backchecked his sources cited? If you had, you wouldn’t get impressed either. Unlike David Barton, who he ridicules, Pinto use very little in the way of primary source documentation. And when he does, he doesn’t contextualize any of it. He accentuates what appears to be anti-Christian quotes by certain founders, but conveniently leaves out other quotes that promote religion and Christianity in particular. From the standpoint of research methods and scholarship, that is irresponsible and unethical.

    6. Check out Pinto’s sources cited and you’ll also find a crime many conspiratorialists are notorious for: circular citing. Citing Cooper quoting Epperson quoting Webster is always questionable and risky. Again, always get primary sources when you can.

    I have more that I can share with you, but time constraints limit me to this post. I’ll elaborate until Derek decides to shut down conversation on this topic (something he does quite often.) I’ll end with this for now: I used to be Derek’s friend, and I made several appearances on his show. I’ve come to see that fringe fundamentalists like him and Pinto are comparable to four-year-olds playing with firearms. They take a little conspiracy fact and twist it to suit presuppositions and to provide a rationale to hate other Christians who diverge from them theologically. Deep political research should not be abused in such a manner.

    Thank you for considering my response.

  5. Darlene

    Hmmmm…interesting. I’m not at all familiar with you or your work, Paul…so after I read your response, I did a little digging. Seems, once upon a time, you and Mr. Pinto would have agreed on quite a bit. I wonder what happened? I’m thinking this must be a personal issue…because I can’t readily see a “paper trail” of your transformation.

    If that’s indeed the case, it’s none of my business to know details and just something for me to “file” in my brain.

    Thank you for your thoughtful response.

  6. Paul Collins


    Actually, if you read my writings and those of my brother at http://www.conspiracyarchive.com, you’ll see there was no real “transformation.” Our work has always diverged from Pinto’s. Our book is shows a sharp contrast. There are serious points where we break wit Pinto entirely. What did your “digging” involve, exactly?

  7. Darlene

    My “digging”? Just a look at some of your writings and seeing what your beliefs are/were. That’s all. Only what “Google” allows. 🙂

    I’m coming at this from a very outside, third-party sort of perspective. I’m new to a lot of what Pinto, the Gilberts, FutureQuake, Howse, etc. have to offer. So I’m seeing the offerings with “fresher” eyes than many and comparing them to what I already know to be true. And the only “Truth” I know to be true is the Word of God.

    So that’s where I’m coming from. Very simply.

  8. Darlene

    One thing I do know for sure….Chris Pinto is one of the most “divisive” people I’ve ever encountered!

    *Note* “Divisive” is not always bad. In his case, I don’t believe it is.

    He seems to stir the most extreme ire in people I’ve ever witnessed!

  9. Paul Collins


    There’s some books that act as basic primers on this topic that many Christians haven’t read (Including the Gilberts and Dr. Future) simply because the books don’t approach the subject from a fundamentalist Christian perspective. These books, however, are really essential reading and I would encourage you to pick them up. They include:

    1. Tragedy and Hope by Carroll Quigley
    2. The Anglo American Establishment by Carroll Quigley
    3. The Power Elite by C. Wright Mills
    4. Elite Deviance by David Simon
    5. The Perfectibilist by Terry Melanson
    6. Fire in the Minds of Men by James Billington
    7. The Secret Team by L. Fletcher Prouty.
    8. Deep Politics and the Death of JFK by Peter Dale Scott

    If you read these because, you won’t be dissatisfied. They give a beginner a really good understanding of the criminal subculture that causes conspiratorialists concern. The problem with individuals like Pinto and Derek is that they marred the whole thing with paranoia and their bizarre fundamentalist understanding of Biblical eschatology.

    Listen to what they say very carefully. They no longer believe that the elite are engaged in a conspiracy against civilization. They believe civilization is the conspiracy. And that is a very dangerous trajectory to head off in. It turns people against the legitimate civil authority.

  10. Darlene

    Thanks, Paul…and I have heard of a couple of those! Chris Pinto has mentioned one for sure…and I think there is another one he’s mentioned as recommended reading.

    Guess I need to get caught up on my reading. 🙂

  11. Paul Collins

    Timby (or whatever you real name is),

    Your opinion and $1.25 will buy you a cup of coffee anywhere around town. I wasn’t stroking my ego or anyone else’s. There is nothing hubristic about sharing info that flatly debunks Pinto’s anti-American abdication theology. One day, the fringe fundamentalism that Derek and Pinto subscribe to will dissipate. When that day comes, history should be able to record that there were people crying foul.

  12. aubrey

    Mr. Pinto is very much on target, but the subject is much like an onion skin, each layer of the skin covers the truth. The catholic church does not even reflect true Christianity which was born out of the Jerusalem believers in the original “Way”. Yes, I defy any person to take both Rome and Washington DC and try to make a true Chritian foundations out of either. Obelisk and false gods(Statue of Jupiter called St. Peter)yea right, zodiac releifs, false philospher statues, masonic regalia, as well papcey worship (Holy father)Jesus said,” call no man father on this earth, but you have one Father in Heaven. Both the Catholic relegion and the Masons, love to promote the unity/universalism of their faiths and their tolerance of all others, again Jesus said,”I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, no one comes to the Father but by me.” So folks, both foundations are false and the sad things is there are christians that will defend both false doctrines to their graves. Mr. Pinto is trying to get us away from defending some of these false founding fathers and the pseudo christian/american hero status, good example, “The Republic” which these men so carefully designed our Constitutional Republic on, is from Platos Republic and governor/historian Solon’s expressions of Atlantis, yes there is another great christian society which we should use as our foundation, ha, ha., I believe they too were destroyed for their corruption. From birth on, many Americans have been given a strong dose of half truths in order to blind them to the founding fathers as God fearing holy men that never owned a slave, never had numerous affairs,never had split allegience to other countries(played both sides) and were never given to greed or usery and the holy american flag as our Roman standard (Pax Americanus) The real Christians like Mr. Pinto are the average people that continually try to warn the people of the hidden dangers of these men and there false christian foundations modern day false christ’s misleading God’s true children. The Kingdom of God is not here on earth and especially not in America, watch reality tv sometime and tell me if we are a holy God serving selfless people that reflect our Father’s will.

  13. Jonn

    WOW I see a whole other, unsavory side of Collins.
    You, my friend, are sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal — you think you know all mysteries but you’re sounding brass.

  14. Paul Collins


    Are you going to call everyone who cites sound research and facts “sounding brass?” So everyone who says something you don’t want to hear is unsavory?

    So it’s not unsavory to slander the Founders as frothing at the mouth Luciferians? What kind of inverted logic is that?
    Youn fringe fundamentalists need to seriously get a grip. Christianity is alot older than Martin Luther and it doesn’t include the writings of Jack Chick, Eric Jon Phelps or other book-burning misfits who have abandoned Christian culture to join a subculture that rejects orthodoxy and traditionalism, accepts Gnosticism as “apostolic,” and portrays all Christians who do not accept their extremist interpretation of Scripture as “Romanist” (whatever the hell that means) and devil worshippers.

  15. Jonn

    Yeah — you’re still railing in the wrong spirit.
    Your hubris is amazing. You assume too much about me — now you’re making accusations about me. I kinda expected that. Shhhhhhh. Be quiet.

  16. Paul Collins

    “Shhhh. Be quiet.”

    Typical response from someone who wants to avoid the real issues. Noticed you didn’t answer my question.

    By the way, should Gilbert and Pinto be classified as being “in the wrong spirit” for slandering the founders and people with a love of country?

    My hubris is amazing, eh? The same can be said about your self-righteousness.

  17. Paul

    In the realm of polemics and logical argumentation, shushing your opposition won’t cut it. My questions to you remain. Perhaps if you won’t answer them in this forum, hopefully you will at least contemplate them in your own mind.

    At any rate, believe whatever you want to believe. Trust me, reality will not re-adjust itself to accommodate you.

  18. Paul Collins


    I see patronizing and condescension are your strong points. Critical thinking and reason… well, that’s a different story.

    Enjoy you blissful ignorance.

  19. Johnny C.

    Here’s Pinto’s problem:

    1. His work on the occult and its presence in the founding of the United States (through Bacon, Franklin, etc.) is quite good.
    2. Unfortunately it points up the degree to which the occult was in direct opposition to the Catholic Church, and vice versa, and how the occult “wrapped itself” in his words in protestantism to avoid the consequences.
    3. Pinto is clinging to his protestantism in the face of his knowledge that the real fight is between the Catholic Faith (the Church Christ founded) and the occultists (demonologists).
    This is causing great psychic dissonance on his part and his positions cannot be reconciled.
    He is welcome at Mass anytime, but I recommend he attend the Tridentine Mass and not the “Novus Ordo” Mass, as the people he exposes in his work on the occult had their way with the Catholic Church in the 1960’s.
    Unfortunately, as the Catholic Church goes, so goes the rest of Western Civilization. “Calvary Chapel” will not beat the occultists. Sorry, just not going to happen. If the Catholic Church has been infiltrated as it seems to have been, that’s the ballgame folks.

  20. Paula

    btw Paul, since you’re Roman Catholic, obviously you cannot speak a word of truth against Pinto. (yes, being sarcastic here). I’m Lutheran, and I don’t think Pinto’s paranoia fits with a large segment of protestantism either. I’m not sure where it comes from. Both this obsession with occult phenomenon and the obsession with immorality in America (all those people sinning OUT THERE) is Pinto’s problem. Satan doesn’t care what you focus on, as long as it isn’t Christ. That is Pinto’s problem.

    And now that a few Christians have questioned him (not Roman Catholics, but people who respected some of what he did, just didn’t rubber stamp ALL of it) he’s on a spiritual attack kick, constantly blaming everyone else for his loss of credibility. We’ve all become agents of Satan. Brannon Howse is going right along with it quite passive-aggressively as well.

  21. Paula

    btw – when I say John is outgunned in facts, it is not implying that I agree with Paul on what seems to be a LOT of things. But that he is obviously better prepared to defend his position than someone who shows up and accuses of hubris right off the bat for simply carrying on a respectful conversation.

Comments are closed.