It would be good to start saying that I am agnostic. I do think in two ways: What if God exist/what if dont? Same for afterlife and stuff related to that.
I have been philosophically thinking into "what if one of these religions is right?" and this started to make me conceptualize what one true religion is.
This is may sound weird but I had tried to put myself into the God shoes, even if, of course, no human can truly do that. First thing, sorry if this sounds a little offensive to religion people, but God printing his wills into one bible at a specific language for a specific people didnt sound a wise decision to me. Then I actually already brainstormed into how I would pass my message to the humanity if I were a God, by what means. This is a good think to be thought at. There are some possibilities, instant shared dreams is one interesting thing (a dream everybody has), and after some thought I realize that God could write a Bible into our own intuition and create a sense of right and wrong printed into our own intuition. I think, at least from my own ideas, that would be the best form of it. That was months ago.
In my life I have been observing that there are some stuff that happens that I can only explain by a ghost... I mean, some behaviours and stuff seem to quite repeats themselves, patterns repeating themselves despite the place and time being completely different and disconnected with each other. Different and independent sources carrying the same spell. I have been calling, but not speaking much about it, the thing that generates these things as "Ghost". Some years ago I even questioned myself if it was the product of some secret agency of some sort, bbuuuttt I realized that perhaps not, I always were unsure of.
Then, two or three weeks ago, I had some strange dream being bitten by a snake in the afternoon and dying in the evening. Looking for the meaning of this dream on the internet, since dreams with snakes does have some meaning for Freud and for Jung (but none truly convinced me and I dropped the quest), I got introduced to the concept of Jung Archetypes and Jung collective unconcious (Im not talking about the Ne-archetype, Ni-archetype, but archetypes popularly known as "the trickster", "the ruler", "the wise old man", etc...). And I am also not refering to the misuse of that concept into cognitive function stack, so Im not talking about the demon function that is on the 6th position of "the stack", not at all like that. For those who doesnt know, I read partially from here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_unconscious
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jungian_archetypes
Someday perhaps Ill read right into the original source that it is difficult to get in my native language (that isnt english).
But continuing, even reading a very poor resumes of the critiques of the concept, I realized that Jung actually catch something at that, even if it is not at all collective unconscious but some product of genetics. He got my ghosts. It was the first explanation so far connecting repeteable patterns of behaviour in completely disconnected places and context.
I realized that Jungs archetypes can be anything: Collective unconscious, genes, ancient powerful souls, Gods (in a religion with multiple Gods like on the Greek one) or my ghost I was so looking for, but at least they should be something. And they explain some disconnected behaviours: People subscribing to the same archetype, and to be honest, thats not something I would link to a behaviour from MBTI or enneagram type.
This seems like a derail but it isnt. What I realize is that people, at least in Jungs point, subscribe to something without realizing they are doing it. And thats exactly what I think the true religion, if there is one, should be.
I think the one true religion, the real truth in a quite literal way of speaking it, must be universal, like the Jungs archetypes are supposed to be (universal at least from an human point). It doesnt need to spread: It should be something we adhere to by our own choices without even realizing it. It must be something that you are free to adhere whenever you lived your whole life in the forest in the middle of the Amazon in 1300 ac or in Europe or in Asia or 21st century in America, basically, anywhere.
The one true religion should be universal and my strong case against religions we know is that they arent universal. For many religions, an indian that lived his whole life isolated (not the country of Asia, Im talking about the indians in the Amazon forest) cant be saved because he didnt passed through some sort of process in some building mediated by some sort of institution and didnt read and follow a certain holy book. I dont think a reasonable God would reserve the salvation to some small fraction of humanity, some folk in the middle of somewhere or nowhere in the earth while leaving the rest of the humanity (perhaps more than 90%) in the dark while waiting the priviliged folk that received his words to spread them and start translating the holy book in other languages. I think that, instead, the religion is rather universal, and that anyone in anywhere anytime can, without even realizing, subscribing to sub-aspects of it or create his/her own salvation (if there is really such a thing like that). This may sound weird at first, but just look into Jung archetypes: We more or less subscribe to a few of them, without even knowing it. One possibility is, instead of going into a heaven or hell, we would go to the same place where the subscribers of our favorite archetype goes, and depending on that, that place could be one kind of heaven, hell, or something different than that.
It started as just a thought but as week passes I become more and more strong convinced to. I hope I was clear enough. So, thoughts? Despite me being agnostic, im also growing a belief that there is life after death, but of course I am no sure of eat. I would bet for life after death.
I have been philosophically thinking into "what if one of these religions is right?" and this started to make me conceptualize what one true religion is.
This is may sound weird but I had tried to put myself into the God shoes, even if, of course, no human can truly do that. First thing, sorry if this sounds a little offensive to religion people, but God printing his wills into one bible at a specific language for a specific people didnt sound a wise decision to me. Then I actually already brainstormed into how I would pass my message to the humanity if I were a God, by what means. This is a good think to be thought at. There are some possibilities, instant shared dreams is one interesting thing (a dream everybody has), and after some thought I realize that God could write a Bible into our own intuition and create a sense of right and wrong printed into our own intuition. I think, at least from my own ideas, that would be the best form of it. That was months ago.
In my life I have been observing that there are some stuff that happens that I can only explain by a ghost... I mean, some behaviours and stuff seem to quite repeats themselves, patterns repeating themselves despite the place and time being completely different and disconnected with each other. Different and independent sources carrying the same spell. I have been calling, but not speaking much about it, the thing that generates these things as "Ghost". Some years ago I even questioned myself if it was the product of some secret agency of some sort, bbuuuttt I realized that perhaps not, I always were unsure of.
Then, two or three weeks ago, I had some strange dream being bitten by a snake in the afternoon and dying in the evening. Looking for the meaning of this dream on the internet, since dreams with snakes does have some meaning for Freud and for Jung (but none truly convinced me and I dropped the quest), I got introduced to the concept of Jung Archetypes and Jung collective unconcious (Im not talking about the Ne-archetype, Ni-archetype, but archetypes popularly known as "the trickster", "the ruler", "the wise old man", etc...). And I am also not refering to the misuse of that concept into cognitive function stack, so Im not talking about the demon function that is on the 6th position of "the stack", not at all like that. For those who doesnt know, I read partially from here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_unconscious
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jungian_archetypes
Someday perhaps Ill read right into the original source that it is difficult to get in my native language (that isnt english).
But continuing, even reading a very poor resumes of the critiques of the concept, I realized that Jung actually catch something at that, even if it is not at all collective unconscious but some product of genetics. He got my ghosts. It was the first explanation so far connecting repeteable patterns of behaviour in completely disconnected places and context.
I realized that Jungs archetypes can be anything: Collective unconscious, genes, ancient powerful souls, Gods (in a religion with multiple Gods like on the Greek one) or my ghost I was so looking for, but at least they should be something. And they explain some disconnected behaviours: People subscribing to the same archetype, and to be honest, thats not something I would link to a behaviour from MBTI or enneagram type.
This seems like a derail but it isnt. What I realize is that people, at least in Jungs point, subscribe to something without realizing they are doing it. And thats exactly what I think the true religion, if there is one, should be.
I think the one true religion, the real truth in a quite literal way of speaking it, must be universal, like the Jungs archetypes are supposed to be (universal at least from an human point). It doesnt need to spread: It should be something we adhere to by our own choices without even realizing it. It must be something that you are free to adhere whenever you lived your whole life in the forest in the middle of the Amazon in 1300 ac or in Europe or in Asia or 21st century in America, basically, anywhere.
The one true religion should be universal and my strong case against religions we know is that they arent universal. For many religions, an indian that lived his whole life isolated (not the country of Asia, Im talking about the indians in the Amazon forest) cant be saved because he didnt passed through some sort of process in some building mediated by some sort of institution and didnt read and follow a certain holy book. I dont think a reasonable God would reserve the salvation to some small fraction of humanity, some folk in the middle of somewhere or nowhere in the earth while leaving the rest of the humanity (perhaps more than 90%) in the dark while waiting the priviliged folk that received his words to spread them and start translating the holy book in other languages. I think that, instead, the religion is rather universal, and that anyone in anywhere anytime can, without even realizing, subscribing to sub-aspects of it or create his/her own salvation (if there is really such a thing like that). This may sound weird at first, but just look into Jung archetypes: We more or less subscribe to a few of them, without even knowing it. One possibility is, instead of going into a heaven or hell, we would go to the same place where the subscribers of our favorite archetype goes, and depending on that, that place could be one kind of heaven, hell, or something different than that.
It started as just a thought but as week passes I become more and more strong convinced to. I hope I was clear enough. So, thoughts? Despite me being agnostic, im also growing a belief that there is life after death, but of course I am no sure of eat. I would bet for life after death.
