GOD is increasing in knowledge. What?

[Hemidakota]

GOD IS INCREASING IN KNOWLEDGE? What? Something I just read by President Wilford Woodruff. How many times have you heard in church that this is not so?

If there was a point where man in his progression could not proceed any further, the very idea would throw a gloom over every intelligent and reflecting mind. God Himself is increasing and progressing in knowledge, power, and dominion, and will do so, worlds without end. It is just so with us. We are in a probation, which is a school of experience.-JD 6:120, December 6, 1857.

And the monkey offers the banana.

http://i.azjmp.com/0SbSY

Edited April 23, 2009 by Hemidakota

[Hemidakota]

Further reading here, by Eugene England BYU Studies, vol. 29 (1989), same difficult challenge of trying to decouple from one's leader assessment to another in direct opposition on what stated [concerning the progression of knowledge of GOD].

It is difficult to imagine a more stark contradiction in authoritative statements about the Mormon concept of God: Hyrum Smith says that God has all wisdom and power; Brigham Young says that he does not and is progressing in those attributes. How could there be such a dramatic reversal in dogma? Isn't this a simple matter of fact or falsehood? Isn't it certain that either God is perfect, with all knowledge and power, or he is not? How could there be direct opposition at the prophetic level about something so unambiguous and fundamental?

My simple thesis here is that, in fact, these statements are not contradictory. 4 These Church leaders were using two different, but complementary, ways of talking about God based on two different aspects of the Mormon understanding of God, both of which, I believe, are essential to our theology and must be maintained. With the help of a basic concept--that of different, progressive spheres of development and of possible perfection within each sphere--it is possible to believe both in God's perfection of knowledge and power in relation to our sphere and in his progression in these attributes in his own and higher spheres. This concept was first firmly articulated by Brigham Young, but it was suggested earlier in some of Joseph Smith's discourses and in the Doctrine and Covenants, and it has been employed by most of the main figures in Mormon theology from the beginning until the present.

Joseph Smith taught both of these doctrines about God. The Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants, consistent with the traditional Christian scriptures, refer to God as having all knowledge and all power. 5 The Church's earliest major doctrinal exposition, the Lectures on Faith, actually uses the traditional Christian categories (borrowed from Greek philosophy) of omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence in describing God. It makes the explicit claim that "without the knowledge of all things God would not be able to save any portion of his creatures . . . and if it were not for the idea existing in the minds of men that God had all knowledge it would be impossible for them to exercise faith in him." [Lectures on Faith, 44, in all editions of the Doctrine and Covenants before 1921]

Joseph Smith's part in authoring the Lectures on Faith is still uncertain. They seem mainly the work of Sidney Rigdon, and some readers have suspected they reflect a very early stage of Mormon doctrinal expression about God, one still heavily influenced by traditional Christian creeds. [On authorship and decanonization see Leland H. Gentry, "What of the Lectures on Faith?" BYU Studies 19 (Fall 1978): 5-19, and Richard S. Van Wagoner, Steven C. Walker, and Allen D. Roberts, "The 'Lectures on Faith': A Case Study in Decanonization," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 20 (Fall 1987): 71-77. For a consideration of apparent changes in doctrine that may have led to the decanonization, see Thomas G. Alexander, "The Reconstruction of Mormon Doctrine," in Line Upon Line: Essays on Mormon Doctrine, ed. Gary James Bergera (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1989), 53-66, and for a critique of Alexander, see Robert L. Millett, "Joseph Smith and Modern Mormonism: Orthodoxy, Neorthodoxy, Tension and Tradition," on pages 49-68 of this isue.]

For instance, God is described as a personage of spirit, only Christ as a personage of tabernacle, and the Holy Ghost not as a personage at all but as a kind of unifying mind of the Father and Son. Those who quote the Lectures on Faith have had to editorialize, to add footnotes and explanations in order to make it conform to later orthodox Mormon thought, as, for instance, Joseph Fielding Smith does at the beginning of Doctrines of Salvation. This problem was recognized in the inclination of Church authorities to revise the Lectures on Faith in the early 1900s, or at least to add a footnote, and then the 1921 decision instead to exclude them from the Doctrine and Covenants. 8 But Joseph Smith never repudiated them. It is likely that, had they been written later, as his understanding developed, he too would have qualified or explained some of the terms and concepts used there, but I think he saw no inherent contradiction between them and his later understanding of God's relationship to higher spheres of existence.

[Justice]

I have always believed that God knows everything He needs to know to perfect His children. I have complete trust and faith in that.

Now, if you tell me there are some things He has yet to experience and learn, I'd believe you.

But, if it were possible for God to learn something at a future period that changed His views or understanding of how to perfect His children, and He could have accomplished it a "better way" thereby saving more of His children, then there would be no justice or truth in existence.

God is all-knowing and all-powerful over elements. I would be arrogant to assume there is not more out there than what God has revealed. He only reveals what we need to know in order to perfect us.

[Moksha]

Is there not always more to learn as new data develops with the changes of time?

[TruthSeekerToo]

Is there not always more to learn as new data develops with the changes of time?

This is true for humans in mortality. It seems that God already knows it all.

Hemi, thanks for the info on how the Lectures on Faith got demoted.

It's also funny to see that doctrine really has changed. Or at least, what is accepted as doctrine.

[bytor2112]

From Elder Bruce R McConkie:

Now may I suggest the list of heresies.

Heresy one: There are those who say that God is progressing in knowledge and is learning new truths.

This is false-utterly, totally, and completely. There is not one sliver of truth in it. It grows out of a wholly twisted and incorrect view of the King Follett Sermon and of what is meant by eternal progression.

God progresses in the sense that his kingdoms increase and his dominions multiply-not in the sense that he learn new truths and discovers new laws. God is not a student. He is not a laboratory technician. He is not postulating new theories on the basis of past experiences. He has indeed graduated to that state of exaltation that consists of knowing all things and having all power.

He has indeed graduated to that state of exaltation that consists of knowing all things and having all power.

The life that God lives is named eternal life. His name, one of them, is "Eternal," using that word as a noun and not as an adjective, and he uses that name to identify the type of life that he lives. God's life is eternal life, and eternal life is God's life. They are one and the same. Eternal life is the reward we shall obtain if we believe and obey and walk uprightly before him. And eternal life consists of two things. It consists of life in the family unit, and also, of inheriting, receiving, and possessing the fulness of the glory of the Father. Anyone who has each of these things is an inheritor and possessor of the greatest of all gifts of God, which is eternal life.

Eternal progression consists of living the kind of life God lives and of increasing in kingdoms and dominions everlastingly. Why anyone should suppose that an infinite and eternal being who has presided in our universe for almost 2,555,000,000 years, who made the sidereal heavens, whose creations are more numerous than the particles of the earth, and who is aware of the fall of every sparrow-why anyone would suppose that such a being has more to learn and new truths to discover in the laboratories of eternity is totally beyond my- comprehension.

Will he one day learn something that will destroy the plan of salvation and turn man and the universe into an uncreated nothingness? Will he discover a better plan of salvation than the one he has already given to men in worlds without number?

The saving truth, as revealed to and taught, formally and officially, by the Prophet Joseph Smith in the Lectures on Faith is that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. He knows all things, he has all power, and he is everywhere present by the power of his Spirit. And unless we know and believe this doctrine we cannot gain faith unto life and salvation.

Joseph Smith also taught in the Lectures on Faith "that three things are necessary in order that any rational and intelligent being may exercise faith in God unto life and salvation." These he named as-

1. The idea that he actually exists;

2. A correct idea of his character, perfections, and attributes; and

3. An actual knowledge that the course of life which he is pursuing is according to the divine will.

The attributes of God are given as knowledge, faith or power, justice, judgment, mercy, and truth. The perfections of God are named as "the perfections which belong to all of the attributes of his nature," which is to say that God possesses and has all knowledge, all faith or power, all justice, all judgment, all mercy, and all truth. He is indeed the very embodiment and personification and source of all these attributes. Does anyone suppose that God can be more honest than he already is? Neither need any suppose there are truths he does not know or knowledge he does not possess.

Thus Joseph Smith taught, and these are his words: Without the knowledge of all things, God would not be able to save any portion of his creatures; for it is by reason of the knowledge which he has of all things, from the beginning to the end, that enables him to give that understanding to his creatures by which they are made partakers of eternal life; and if it were not for the idea existing in the minds of men that God had all knowledge it would-be impossible for them to exercise faith in him. [As quoted by Bruce R. McConkie in Mormon Doctrine (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft), p. 264]

If God is just dabbling with a few truths he has already chanced to learn or experimenting with a few facts he has already discovered, we have no idea as to the real end and purpose of creation.

[deseretgov]

Sorry, I can't(right now) believe that God lacks any knowledge. In order for God to be perfect then He must know everything that is knowable. I do believe that He still progresses through us, His children. If God is the God of this universe then when His children progress to godhood they would each be gods of their own universes*. So this would mean God is no longer the God of mortals but is the God of gods. Similar to how things are here. A son becomes a father of children. Then his children have children and now he is a grandfather. His grandchildren have children and now he is a great grandfather. His family is increasing. I think it is the same in the eternities.

* According to Super string theory infinite number of universed can exists parallel to each other. Like slices of bread.

[Elgama]

I'm with Presidents Woodruff and Young on this one, God is growing like we all are, I believe he knows and understands everything we are currently capable of, but once we have progressed what is the point if from then on we just stagnate

-Charley

[rameumptom]

This was a big controversy between Brigham Young and Orson Pratt. Pratt insisted that God only progresses in dominion and power. Brigham Young called him to the carpet on it, and forced him to write a retraction. Pres Young insisted that God knows all there is to know of the past and present, but he does not yet know the future, and there are things to learn from it. Of course, none of this would affect core doctrines.

Since then, the Church has moved to Pratt's side of the discussion. Elder McConkie and others have insisted that God has total foreknowledge. Yet, the debate gets murky when we begin discussing agency and free will. Do we really have agency, if God already knows what we'll do prior to our choosing?

Some LDS are actually beginning to return to Pres Young's point of view, such as Blake Ostler in his philosophical writings on Mormonism.

[TruthSeekerToo]

If God doesn't know the future how on earth are we able to have prophesies?

[Madriglace]

The script doesn't change only the actors .... there are a certain set of events that must happen and the people involved were foreordained to be part of the events ... however they have their agency to make their choices. Kind of like ... keep up or get out of the way. Joseph Smith comes to mind when he was having such a hard time with polygamy ... the angel told him basically either do it or die. Sure the Lord knows what is going to happen but we still have our agency to choose where we stand.

[TruthSeekerToo]

Yeah, God sees the future.

D&C 130: 7

7 But they reside in the presence of God, on a globe like a sea of glass and fire, where all things for their glory are manifest, past, present, and future, and are continually before the Lord.

[deseretgov]

Do we really have agency, if God already knows what we'll do prior to our choosing?

Yep! :) How would God's foreknowledge affect our choices?

Thanks to TruthSeekerToo for that D&C reference.

[Dr T]

I think God the Father is perfect and cannot grow, get better or mature (personally). I say this because in my mind if God needed to grow and didn't know something then he would not be perfect imo. It does not seem to follow from my belief system that "God has to grow in knowledge."

[bytebear]

God the Father does not himself grow or gain wisdom or knowlege or become more perfect, but his children do, and that refects back on him. Every time you learn even one eternal truth, God grows.

[JohnnyRudick]

Yeah, God sees the future.

D&C 130: 7

7 But they reside in the presence of God, on a globe like a sea of glass and fire, where all things for their glory are manifest, past, present, and future, and are continually before the Lord.

Because of this and other verses I have always believed that God could stand outside of time and act independent of it's constraints.

Playing it's fabric like a multi string harp.

Bro. Rudick

Edited April 24, 2009 by JohnnyRudick
After thought;-)

[Moksha]

Hidden within the term Eternal Progression is the implication that we will be learning forever.

[bytebear]

Hidden within the term Eternal Progression is the implication that we will be learning forever.

Based on D&C 50:24, I would say we will be learning for a long time, but eventually we will know it all on "that perfect day."

That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day.

[deseretgov]

JohnnyRudick I agree. Eternity cannot exist within the constraints of time.

Hidden within the term Eternal Progression is the implication that we will be learning forever.

For me eternal progression mean improving states, not necessarily knowledge. We started(that we know of) as intelligences. Then we gained spirit bodies. After that we gained physical bodies. If we continue our progression we can become celestial beings. If we continue our progression we can have spirit children. Our spirit children can gain physical bodies. etc etc for eternity.

[bmy-]

Don't tell that to Bruce R. McConkie and Pratt Our religion was built on this concept.

Edited April 25, 2009 by bmy-

[Maxel]

JohnnyRudick I agree. Eternity cannot exist within the constraints of time.

Does the idea of Eternity- endless time- require that time be taken out of the equation? If I had an endless amount of doughnuts, would I suddenly have no dougnuts but be freed of all need to eat by virtue of having said endless supply? Could you explain a bit more?

Interesting to note: the ancient Hebrew concept of 'eternity' is that it actually existed within a set framework of time (it had a beginning and the end). Hence in scripture such as "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was God" there would be an implication that, just as there would be time after 'the beginning', there was also a time before 'the beginning'.

[JohnnyRudick]

Does the idea of Eternity- endless time- require that time be taken out of the equation? If I had an endless amount of doughnuts, would I suddenly have no dougnuts but be freed of all need to eat by virtue of having said endless supply? Could you explain a bit more?

Interesting to note: the ancient Hebrew concept of 'eternity' is that it actually existed within a set framework of time (it had a beginning and the end). Hence in scripture such as "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was God" there would be an implication that, just as there would be time after 'the beginning', there was also a time before 'the beginning'.

OK, I am speaking outside the Scriptures but I could find scripture that would fit into my (not really mine per say) ideas.

JohnnyRudick chap. # Verse*

Time is as a web stretched out throughout the Universe.

Height, Width, Depth and Motion.

Picture our Universe (billions of different types of stars with systems of their own) as a 4d object. Preferably a web stretching out in all directions.

if you fully understood the mechanics of this web you would know how to manipulate it for your own designs.

Maybe even create your own similar web within this one giving you absolute control of the one you created.

"In the Beginning" of this time web we have assembled.

This way they can see forward and back simultaneously.

Yes a beginning in it's new form and a possible end but not necessarily prerequisite for it's function.

Just a thought:D

Bro. Rudick

Edited April 25, 2009 by JohnnyRudick
After thought;-)

[rameumptom]

If God doesn't know the future how on earth are we able to have prophesies?

Eugene England suggested a middle knowledge. That everything within the creations God has created, he has foreknowledge. It is, in essence, a closed system that he knows everything about. But on his realm, he would still be learning. So, in D&C 130, when the earth becomes glass and a Urim and Thummim, it reveals the order of the lower kingdoms (everything God has created), while his personal white stone (Urim and Thummim) teaches him the truths of the higher realms.

The other view is that God is the ultimate chess master. Just as a chess master can anticipate potential moves several turns on, God can anticipate many turns as well. Interestingly, revelations often are like that. The sooner a prophecy is to occur, the more detail is involved, while the farther down there seems to be less detail (see D&C 87 for example). This also means that God could occasionally give a prophecy that does not occur, such as the prophecy in D&C 84 that a temple would be built in that generation in Independence Missouri. In this way, he can predict, but still allow his children their agency to choose. This would also explain events, such as Isaiah telling Hezekiah he was to die that night, but after fasting and praying, God changes his mind and tells Hezekiah he can have 15 years more.

Any or all of these ideas can be supported by a close study of the scriptures. Personally, I keep an open mind, but prefer Eugene England's middle knowledge.

[bmy-]

Does the idea of Eternity- endless time- require that time be taken out of the equation? If I had an endless amount of doughnuts, would I suddenly have no dougnuts but be freed of all need to eat by virtue of having said endless supply? Could you explain a bit more?

Interesting to note: the ancient Hebrew concept of 'eternity' is that it actually existed within a set framework of time (it had a beginning and the end). Hence in scripture such as "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was God" there would be an implication that, just as there would be time after 'the beginning', there was also a time before 'the beginning'.

That's why people always say an eternity.. I look at it more like an epoch.. an 'age'.. more than I look at it as infinity.

[Justice]

Yes, "for ever" doesn't necessarily mean "for all time." For ever goes back and forward throughout all the eternities, and is an infinite measure (if it can be measured). But, time starts and stops as each new "heaven and earth" comes into existence and mankind that is destined for that earth falls, and then is perfected. This equates to "one eternal round." So, you can measure things "from eternity to [all] eternity."

That's how I've come to understand it, put very simply.