Religion: Real or Fake

[DinoDoc]

Catholic.

"National Socialism and religion cannot exist together....
"The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity....
"Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things."

[Ben Kenobi]

Guess God never heard of social services.

Unlike the state, God gives people a choice. He doesn't toss them into jail if they say no.

So some Egyptian farmer mook gets to suffer because the .5% of the population the runs the country are slaveholders? Is that what I'm getting from you? God is precise enough to kill all the first born but not precise enough to just kill the leadership? God has a hard on for mass murder.

If he wanted to kill everyone in Egypt why did he sent many different plagues? He wants Pharaoh to agree to release them, and he can't very well do that if he's dead.

You mean when the Jews rebelled? I didn't know that "crushing a rebellion=suppressing a religion".

And apparently reducing the temple to rubble is 'defending religious freedom.' Gotcha.

By the By, you completely dodged acknowledging that the Persians had the whole concept of "religious freedom" down before the Christians did.

Depends on the king. They exiled the Jews in the first place, so they are decidedly a mixed bag.

The edict that was designed specifically for the Christian faith

The Edict explicitly protects all religions, including Christianity. Proclaimed by the first Christian Emperor.

I find it intriguing that you can cite this word for word, but aren't willing to quote what Julian did. The Christians proclaimed religious toleration, and the Emperor Julian attempted to exterminate them. Had he been willing to extend the provisions of the Edict of Milan, rather then attempting to exterminate Christianity, the Edict would have been in place for Theodosius. As it was, the Edict of Milan was no longer in force when Theodosius came to power.

If Pagans wish for Christians to show mercy, it's not a good idea to stab us in the back.

Boy those Christians were all about religious tolerance...so long as it was THEIR religion being tolerated.

ro

Christians have generally been attacked by everyone, even by those who attack us for defending ourselves.

This is a sign that we are right and everyone else is wrong, because no one goes out and says, "oh those naughty pagans", because they expect Pagans to be untrustworthy and vicious. They expect Christians to be tolerant and peaceful.

No they didn't you twit, they are the ones who allowed the Jews to return from the Babylonian Captivity.

Eventually, when the right king came to power, yes. Before that? no. Which is why the Jews were so worried that the permission to rebuild the temple would be rescinded.

This doesn't prove that the concept of religious freedom originated with the Christians

Is there a similar proclamation anywhere else prior to the Edict of Milan, granting religious freedom throughout the state?

It proves that once they were in power they wanted to create an environment to make sure no pagan emperors or administrators would be able to take action.

The edict says nothing about barring Pagan emperors from returning to power, which is exactly what did happen. If the point of the Edict was to preserve Christian power, then it did a very poor job of it.

And that's if you take it at face value. Within 80 years Christians emperors were flat out declaring other religions illegal.

After Julian expressed desire to exterminate all of us, and he lost the ensuing civil war, yes.

There were plenty of secularlist folks that were sent to the gulag too, does that mean the Bolshies were a anti-secularist force?

So you admit that the Soviets were anti-Christian? Thank you. Yeah, the Bolsheviks didn't like splitters from their own national religion, be they mensheviks or Trotskyites.

Also, interesting that you are now moving the goal post from "Christians" to "some Christians".

If Atheists espoused religious tolerance, then there would be no such distinction, nor reason for them to make said distinction within the Soviet Union.

I completely agree that people are responsible for suffering, as God does not exist, or at least if a Divine Progenitor does exist it is not the Yahweh that revealed himself to a bunch of bronze age mooks in the desert.

Then why are you so mad at Him?

And you can bet that Religious people(the kind that go to church/temple/Mosque once a week) are less tolerant of others than atheists. How many atheists are out there protesting gay marriage, demanding that public office holders swear that "there is no god" in order to hold that position, pitching a fit about mosques being built in the CHRISTIAN country?

How many of them are out there protesting the ten commandments, and the retention of a cross on public grounds? Plenty, sir.

Which is why he executed Catholic priests for speaking out against his regime?
I'm guessing because they spoke "out against his regime". Christians have been killing Christians for thousands of years.

Well yes, gassing Jews is sort of an evil deed. I suppose they should have said nothing and then Hitler would have eliminated them anyways.

Christianity is defined as "going to church"?

Religious people(the kind that go to church/temple/Mosque once a week

So you can't tell me who Hitler had as his confessor, or where he attended Church. Yet, you assert that he is a Catholic. Catholics, unlike other Christians have expectations and requirements wrt attendence. Right there in the doctrine. So when someone claims to be Catholic, the correct question is where is their parish and who is their confessor? Practicing Catholics will have both.

Bull**** You watch too many Indiana Jones movies. A Pagan State would not make school children pray to Jesus or have the head of the Secret police attend mass on a regular basis.

He was quite into the teachings of the Order of Teutons.

So let's see. On your hand, you cannot tell me where he attended Church or who his confessor was, but I can tell you who introduced him to the occult. GSM.

The problem is that the regime persecutes everyone, not just Christians

Which makes them rather intolerant, n'est-ce pas? You aren't helping your argument here.

But I'm glad to see that you admit would use every tool at hand, include those in your official capacity, to influence others into living your religious view

It's in my job description. You might as well act surprised when a chaplain attempts to dissuade you from abandoning Christ.

It isn't a loyalty oath issue. Loyalty oaths(I am thinking of Presidential oaths, or the one I took in the Navy) are important because they very clearly lay out what is expected of you. Read the actual section in the Texan Constitution, which says I have to profess a belief in a Supreme Being(the Surpeme Being could be the Noid for all I know). This means if I don't believe in ANY supreme being I am excluded from holding public office.

I am aware, and the oath I can't swear because I'm supposed to let my yes be yes, and no, no, and not swear on God at all.

A crazy person that thinks a fern is God would be allowed to hold public office before me. (although I doubt he would get elected)

Kinky Friedman?

Interesting, and in other places you talk about how the United States is the "most free" on the basis of low taxes(and presumably) low government interference into how one conducts his business. So what you REALLY mean "except in cases where it directly conflicts with religious belief".

You say that as if all places in the US were certain towns in Virginia. No states have this as a state-wide law, and only some smaller jurisdictions do. Compared with liquor regulations in other countries, this is quite free.

In other words, you are all for the Tyranny of the Majority.

Communities have the right to determine things such as holidays, times of operation, etc. To obtain a liquor license one must abide by these regulations. If a person is unhappy with the laws in a jurisdiction, they are free to move elsewhere. Considering as you actually reside in a jurisdiction that does not have these regulations, this is liberty in action.

I am reasonably indifferent to the availability of hard liquor, being a beer man, but I am just showing how state control of liquor access is because of the heavily conservative Christian nature of Virginia outside of Fairfax County.

We have dry counties here too.

They may have said that they were Christians but they were not REALLY Christians

Hmm? You need to reread that, I was arguing in favour of episcopalians in the time of the revolution being Christian.

The great thing about this is that many of the Founding Fathers were in Congress

Yet you don't cite who. Was quorum present?

Hold on, you are basically ranking personal freedom on Taxes?

Yep, sure am. The state not telling me what to do with my money is an important part of freedom.

it is certainly not "Free", not in the sense that a westerner would call it. 80%+ of the housing there is government housing, which greatly restricts your liberty

This is point well taken. However personal taxes are substantially less there than elsewhere, and government debt is reasonably low.

I mean just to have one guy standing on a box with a sign and yelling into a megaphone.

I've done that many times, it's not nearly as expensive or difficult as you make it out to be. With proper organization, it's much cheaper than a movie ticket and far more entertaining.

So really, you DO support restricting allowing people to engage in commerce based solely on their belief

I support the right of the community to having zoning regulations too which is a restriction on commerce.

I'm thinking more in terms of abruptly realizing that the canister of fuel you have is half empty.

Didn't they teach you to be prepared?

Because, at the very least, there should be a door open to letting kids succeed in life. Education is how you increase your marketability. To use a common phrase, a rising tide lifts all boats.

And public schools are doing a poor job of accomplishing this.

If, on the other hand, you teach religion in a science class then you are hindering the critical thinking process. You don't know what a child is going to do with his or her life and teaching against what the scientific consensus is is a terrible handicap. Teachign outright lies in history classes skews the context of how we got here. Crap, you're spewing BS about the US legal system being founded on "The Bible".

Yes, and I'd only have to quote the chief justices of the united states, in Scalia and Thomas to defend the thesis. Not to mention several law professors that I have known and been friends with over the years. Legal progressivism is a relatively new construct. I'm not a lawyer, but I do read them and what they have to say about jurisprudence.

Nonsense. If you get rid of public education then only the rich get educated, or we have our very own (Christian) versions of Madrassas in the states.

Why would Christians only teach the rich? Parochial schools have been very effective and open to all. They also result in a lowering of the costs of education, as they can provide educational services at a much lower cost than the public school system.

And the difference in pushing my "beliefs" (i.e. science in science courses) is that I am not forcing a religion on anyone. I am saying that in a science class the scientific consensus should be taught. Otherwise my tax dollars are going to support a religious viewpoint that is not my own.

The belief that philosophy and natural philosophy are distinct realms of thought is an opinion not a fact.

Please note that teaching the scientific consensus in public school science classes doesn't attack the existence of a Divine Progenitor, it is explaining theories that bets fit the evidence at hand.

I am not arguing that religion ought to be taught in science courses, I am simply arguing that theories which at present do not have direct observational evidence ought not be taught. I am also arguing that one cannot teach science without teaching the method and definition of science, which are very much philosophical concepts which explain empiricism. Science is a branch of empiricism, and anyone who cannot understand empiricism will make a poor scientist.

Roman Law and Norman Law, you twit. English Common Law curbed religious legal power.

Justice Thomas disagrees.

Ever read the 10 Commandments?

I could if protestors would permit me.

I'm okay with forcing people to pay for things that uniformly improve the standard of living

So you are ok with forcing people to pay for things that they do not want to pay for because you believe that you know better than they do. Is that correct? You are willing to throw someone in jail for this?

Texas that is so unwilling to implement even the most basic of taxation (Hurr hurr "free") that they are in the process of burning down public education and law enforcement.

Indeed, we are free here in Texas, much more so than in the slave states of the union. Once Virginia was free as we are now, but they are no longer. Once every state was as free as we are, but they have almost all chosen slavery.

I'm sure that nothing but good things will come to the state that chops public education by 13%, the agency that supervises parolees by 21%, and legal aid for the poor by 15%. ****, we could suck it up and implement a sane tax policy(I mean Texas is 49th in spending per capita in the country), but we gotta be free as we ride this death spiral.

49th? That's terrible. Who's slipped past us?

And oh, I'm sorry, who is it that grants civil liberties if not the government?

God. "they are endowed by their Creator certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Required teaching in my civics class, btw. I have to teach the declaration of independence as is.

Yeah, okay buddy. My county has under 6% unemployment, what's the average rate for Texas? At least 2% more, and the salaries, schools, and crime rate suck. It is the promised land.

Given that Fairfax VA is relatively proximate to Washington DC one can surmise that government spending procures a significant proportion of employment, which also explains your position in favour of said employment. We know this because the statewide employment in VA is drastically different than in Fairfax. Not so with TX.

[giblets]

Higher then public education, that's for sure. All my students can read.

They'd be able to read if they went to a public school too.

Then why do they have to force people to pay in order to fund them? If a teacher came up to you, and told you that you could sponsor a student and their education for the low price of 460 a month, would you do it?

Education has positive externalities.

[Ben Kenobi]

They'd be able to read if they went to a public school too.

Not necessarily. Most won't be capable of reading a college textbook.

Education has positive externalities.

So does Faith. Doesn't mean you should be paying for it.

[giblets]

Not necessarily. Most won't be capable of reading a college textbook.

Why won't your students be able to read a college textbook? Doesn't sound like your school is very good.

So does Faith. Doesn't mean you should be paying for it.

Aren't churches tax exempt? So people are paying for it.

[giblets]

Indeed, we are free here in Texas, much more so than in the slave states of the union. Once Virginia was free as we are now, but they are no longer. Once every state was as free as we are, but they have almost all chosen slavery.

What the hell are you talking about?

[Ben Kenobi]

Why won't your students be able to read a college textbook? Doesn't sound like your school is very good.

Most public school students won't. Plenty of stats out there showing that public education is just not getting the job done.

Aren't churches tax exempt?

So are most charities. Doesn't mean you are paying to keep them running.

[Ben Kenobi]

What the hell are you talking about?

And the people in the slave states have forgotten that they once were free.

[Elok]

"National Socialism and religion cannot exist together....
"The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity....
"Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things."

It's hard to say WTF Hitler actually believed in, religiously; from the disparate sayings he left behind on the matter, it seems he spun a "Wheel of Fortune"-type wheel every morning and decided he was whatever it landed on. He doesn't seem to have been a serious atheist, and he certainly wasn't a Jew (in the religious sense). Otherwise, he was part Catholic, part deist, part pagan...

[giblets]

Most public school students won't. Plenty of stats out there showing that public education is just not getting the job done.

I'm sorry but you're talking bull****. If you compare people from similar socioeconomic backgrounds you won't see private schools performing better.

So are most charities. Doesn't mean you are paying to keep them running.

If you give someone a tax exemption, you have to shift more of the tax burden onto someone else.

[giblets]

And the people in the slave states have forgotten that they once were free.

If you think an income tax is 'slavery' then you would have to be an idiot to not also see how sales tax, franchise tax, and property tax meet your definition of 'slavery'.

[Docfeelgood]

interesting way to look at it this way.

[Ben Kenobi]

If you think an income tax is 'slavery' then you would have to be an idiot to not also see how sales tax, franchise tax, and property tax meet your definition of 'slavery'.

I have a choice as to whether I wish to participate in the economic activities which generate all of these taxes.

If you compare people from similar socioeconomic backgrounds you won't see private schools performing better.

Why the caveat? You're willing to concede that the average student in private schools performs better than those in public schools?

As for socioeconomic status, students in parochial students do better than their peers in public schools, even after correcting. For half the cost.

If you give someone a tax exemption, you have to shift more of the tax burden onto someone else.

Not if the charitable activity has externalities. They are absorbing a portion of the cost to run social programs, as people who are using their charitable assistance do not have to use public social assistance.

[giblets]

I have a choice as to whether I wish to participate in the economic activities which generate all of these taxes.

Right, good luck choosing not to buy anything that falls under the sales tax. And I guess you can escape the property tax by being homeless.

Why the caveat? You're willing to concede that the average student in private schools performs better than those in public schools?

As for socioeconomic status, students in parochial students do better than their peers in public schools, even after correcting. For half the cost.

The point in the "caveat" is to figure out why the difference exists. Duh. And I don't generally take your statements about catholic stuff at face value.

Not if the charitable activity has externalities. They are absorbing a portion of the cost to run social programs, as people who are using their charitable assistance do not have to use public social assistance.

Yeah but if you had your way you'd probably do away with public social assistance. And I don't see how shifting the tax burden onto people who don't contribute to charity is any different from giving tax dollars to charity.

[Docfeelgood]

For Speculative Gnostics, Atheists and the rest...

First, let me state that i'm not a Freemason.




Then, let me continue and say that i believe that the doctrine of Freemasons is that GAOTU is basically „Anaitos Aitia“ or (as H.Blavatska eloquently put it) : „An Omnipresent, Eternal, Boundless, and Immutable Principle“ .

That would cause some stir among the Abrahamic Freemasons, because their belief in an exclusive, generic God would collide with the GAOTU definition above. Which, by the way, is rather paradoxical from my POV.

But i'll let them clean up their own backyard ...

Nevertheless, the accent is on „Principle“. There's no god-like entity involved. Just a Principle.

Creation, exoterically speaking, has many stages or levels, of which the higher are analogous to lower. Or, simply put : as above, so below.

Image

The Eliphas Levi’s image above is really the GAOTU. Grand Architect of the Universe.

But indeed - however Levi's image might look hideous - the GAOTU is YOU.

Historically and virtually, designing and building multiple levels of Temples is Hermetic and Freemasonic allegory of the Architecture. The physical Temple is - the Temple inside. Inside YOU.

The most important tools of trade in ancient architecture were builder’s Square and Compass. Medieval Operative Stonemasons used those tools to build Temples. But as time went by, with the reduced need for physical Temples, Speculative Freemasons preserved and accordingly modernised those symbols and rituals, concentrating more on the building of the Temples inside. Building your consciousness, in order to become – simply said - a better person. That’s for me, as a non-Freemason, also a very acceptable idea.

Accordingly, the most powerful Freemasonic symbols, which are emphasising the above virtues, are Square and Compass :


Regarding Square and Compass, let me quote excerpts from Albert Pike's, „Morals and Dogma“, the chapter „Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret“ :



...an old Hermetic Symbol, copied from the "MATERIA PRIMA" of Valentinus, printed at Franckfurt, in 1613, with a treatise entitled "AZOTH." Upon it you see a Triangle upon a Square, both of these contained in a circle; and above this, standing upon a dragon, a human body, with two arms only, but two heads, one male and the other female. By the side of the male head is the Sun, and by that of the female head, the Moon, the crescent within the circle of the full moon. And the hand on the male side holds a Compass, and that on the female side, a Square.

The Heavens and the Earth were personified as Deities, even among the Aryan Ancestors of the European nations of the Hindus, Zends, Bactrians, and Persians; and the Rig Veda Sanhita contains hymns addressed to them as gods. They were deified also among the Phœnicians; and among the Greeks OURANOS and GEA, Heaven and Earth, were sung as the most ancient of the Deities, by Hesiod.

It is the great, fertile, beautiful MOTHER, Earth, that produces, with limitless profusion of beneficence, everything that ministers to the needs, to the comfort, and to the luxury of man. From her teeming and inexhaustible bosom come the fruits, the grain, the flowers, in their season. From it comes all that feeds the animals which serve man as laborers and for food. She, in the fair Springtime, is green with abundant grass, and the trees spring from her soil, and from her teeming vitality take their wealth of green leaves. In her womb are found the useful and valuable minerals; hers are the seas the swarm with life; hers the rivers that furnish food and irrigation, and the mountains that send down the streams which swell into these rivers; hers the forests that feed the sacred fires for the sacrifices, and blaze upon the domestic hearths. The EARTH, therefore, the great PRODUCER, was always represented as a female, as the MOTHER,--Great, Bounteous, Beneficent Mother Earth.

On the other hand, it is the light and heat of the Sun in the Heavens, and the rains that seem to come from them, that in the Springtime make fruitful this bountifully-producing Earth, that restore life and warmth to her veins, chilled by Winter, set running free her streams, and beget, as it were, that greenness and that abundance of which she is so prolific. As the procreative and generative agents, the Heavens and the Sun have always been regarded as male; as the generators that fructify the Earth and cause it to produce.

The Hermaphroditic figure is the Symbol of the double nature anciently assigned to the Deity, as Generator and Producer, as BRAHM and MAYA among the Aryans, Osiris and Isis among the Egyptians. As the Sun was male, so the Moon was female; and Isis was both the sister and the wife of Osiris. The Compass, therefore, is the Hermetic Symbol of the Creative Deity, and the Square of the productive Earth or Universe.

From the Heavens come the spiritual and immortal portion of man; from the Earth his material and mortal portion. The Hebrew Genesis says that YEHOUAH formed man of the dust of the Earth, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. Through the seven planetary spheres, represented by the Mystic Ladder of the Mithriac Initiations, and it by that which Jacob saw in his dream (not with three, but with seven steps), the Souls, emanating from the Deity, descended, to be united to their human bodies; and through those seven spheres they must re-ascend, to return to their origin and home in the bosom of the Deity.

The COMPASS, therefore, as the Symbol of the Heavens, represents the spiritual, intellectual, and moral portion of this double nature of Humanity; and the SQUARE, as the Symbol of the Earth, its material, sensual, and baser portion.



Huh?! Hermes and Aphrodite?! The Square and Compass are symbolically a Hermaphroditical God?!

I’ll just stop here...





But allow me, for this occasion only, to discard the Compass, and concentrate on the Square only :



There are many explanations regarding the symbolic meaning of a Square :

Let's see what the Freemasons say themselves :

What one symbol is most typical of Freemasonry as a whole?

Mason and non-Mason alike, nine times out of ten, will answer, “The Square!” Many learned writers on Freemasonry have nominated the square as the most important and vital, most typical and common symbol of the ancient Craft.

Masonically the word “square” has the same three meanings given by the world:

(1) The conception of right-angled-ness -our ritual tells us that the square is an angle of ninety degrees, or the fourth part of a circle;

(2) The builder’s tool, one of our working tools, the Master’s own immovable jewel;

(3) That quality of character which has made “a square man” synonymous not only with a member of our Fraternity, but with uprightness, honesty and dependability.

The first of the three meanings must have been the mathematical conception and we should reflect upon the wisdom and reasoning powers of men who lived five thousand years ago, that they knew the principles of geometry by which a square can be constructed.

The square is the symbol of regulated life and actions. It is the masonic rule for correcting and harmonising conduct on principles or morality and virtue, and as a symbol, it is dedicated to the Master. We also identify ourselves with this symbol, because we are taught that squares, levels and perpendiculars are the proper signs to know a mason.

We are surrounded by squares in our Lodge and the Immediate Past Master and the Past Masters wear it most obviously. It stands, as one of the Great Lights, in the centre of all our activities. It is repeated in our F.C. salute, our feet positions, our way of moving around the Lodge and our legs when at the altar in our Fellow Craft obligation.

History tells us that the square, which is an upright with a right top arm, is the Greek letter gamma. In the construction trade, the square is used for "trueing" stones and "proving" them correct. We can see how easily, the association with truth and virtue could arise. There was the historical belief that the shape of the ancient world was an oblong square and this is represented in our "squared Lodge."

There have been references to the square's meaning as a symbol long before the start of Masonry, as we know it. The Egyptians, Confucius and Aristotle refer to 'square actions' and associate this with honest dealings, high morality and virtue. The symbol is not original, it is certainly far from new, but it seems to have a remarkable consistency of meaning.

If we move on to the Immediate Past Master's jewel for a moment it is normally identical to the Master's in shape except that pendant from it is the 47th problem of Euclid. It is important to remember that Euclid only proved the Pythagorean theorem of about 300 years earlier. When you consider what the theorem shows it is a multitude of further squares. Squares on sides, mathematically 'squared' numbers and a central closed square, about which all the 'proof' stands. As an emphasis of the square symbol we could see nothing which could do it better. We should know that the properties of this triangular arrangement were first thought to be magical in the relationship they demonstrated. We should always marvel that such a simple figure could have had such impact on our world and still has today.



And again, excerpts from Albert Pike's, „Morals and Dogma“, the chapter „Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret“ :

The SQUARE is an instrument adapted for plane surfaces only, and therefore appropriate to Geometry, or measurement of the Earth, which appears to be, and was by the Ancients supposed to be, a plane.

...

The SQUARE, therefore, is a natural and appropriate Symbol of this Earth and the things that belong to it, are of it, or concern it.

...



Now my idea of discarding the Compass becomes more clear. Additionally, if you're familiar with the mechanics of the Compass, you’ll know that it is not strict. It can be stretched. It is very important per se, because it symbolises (among other things), well...a non-strictness :mrgreen: . But i'd like to concentrate on the strictness of a 90 degree angle of a builder's Square.



And i need to emphasise the Square because of its symbolism : ultimate Strictness. As in the non-dualistic strictness of the GAOTU.



So ,what are my standpoints in this treatise, finally? And please be certain that i'm not trying to prove anything, i'm just trying to comprehend the confusion.



1. The Catholic church is very strict about God :

„Thou shalt have no other gods before me.“

2. In symbolic visual arts, such as painting and sculpture (and under assumption that we're talking about strong Christian religious and/or esoteric motives, and regardless of the artistic freedom) if an artist depicts a person with such a powerful symbol of strictness as a builder’s Square in his hands, should not this person be the God?

3. Then, if so, why there are more than one usual suspect in visual arts bursting with symbolism?



Let us list the suspects :

St. Thomas the Apostle:




Jesus:




And if we try harder, we can add the St. Joseph to the list...



So, my final and crucial questions are :

Could this confusion about the real God, the bearer of such an powerful symbol such as builder's Square, be the result of unsureness of the Catholic church who is the real God, or Prophet or whatever is considered the GAOTU?

Could the twin brother, Doubting Thomas, the patron of architects, builders, carpenters, masons, geometricians and theologians, whose Gospel was excluded from the Bible, be the Real Jesus?