Is intelligence finite, and if so...

[CommanderSouth]

Wouldn't that lead to a potential finite number of spirit children?

I ask because, if I am rembering right, are not our spirits made of intelligence?

If that be the case how does that relate to eternal progression? We know God posses all truth so progression doesn't lead to new knowledge, I was under the understanding that it is the growth of the eternal families we are in that increases the glory of God.

If that is correct, wouldn't there be a finite number of spirit children, and seemingly trouble for "eternal" progression, or does this lead us back to the names of God in D&C 19?

Or perhaps I am,

A) Thinking too much,

B) Have flawed premises,

C) Both

D) Just have to wait...

Thanks for your thoughts!

[SpiritDragon]

I don't know that it has ever been officially taught that spirits are made up of intelligences. The first time I had ever heard this concept was from Cleon W. Skousen (in person actually) at a district meeting on my mission in Utah. But to my understanding this is speculation drawn from Abraham chapter 3 verses 22-25

22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones;

23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born.

24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and bwe will make an earth whereon these may dwell;

25 And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them;

This could just as easily be referring to spirits using a different word as it is to be referring to something spirits are made up of.

I do not think there is any concern of running out of spirits or intelligences. There must be some way of perpetuating the process indefinitely.

[CommanderSouth]

Skousen's teachings on intelligences relative to the atonement is one of my favorite talks, pretty deep stuff, but awesome nonetheless...

[Guest]

A.

[CommanderSouth]

Yeah Eowyn, that's entirely possible :)

[ElectofGod]

We are intellgence (singular)

Abraham saw the intelligences (plural)

There are not multiple intelligences inside of us. My belief. I know some early leaders taught differently like the atomism theory by parley. I think its discussed in The seer not sure though. We are without beginning or end... So does that mean we always existed? And ever will? Than why has God progressed to be like god before us? Did god organize him first? Or did our agency restrict it?

Thinking too much? Na! but yea, this stuff makes my head hurt sometimes but its fun. Finite? I doubt it. There is a theory that God organizes spirits through thoughts. Of both male and female. The two thoughts of the two makes an independent, for it only one through their thoughts organized an intelligence it would not be independent based off that one mindset. Yet with two there enters an Independence (opposition). Which allows it to be endowed with agency. If this is the case there is definitely not a finite amount of spirits.

[Quin]

My intelligence is finite. I periodically stretch and find the edges of it, and I've got some very clear boundaries.

My understanding of the Divine is naturally limited as I can only imagine infinite... But my understanding is that the Divine is infinite.

Q

[bytebear]

Worlds without end...

[Seminarysnoozer]

Wouldn't that lead to a potential finite number of spirit children?

I ask because, if I am rembering right, are not our spirits made of intelligence?

If that be the case how does that relate to eternal progression? We know God posses all truth so progression doesn't lead to new knowledge, I was under the understanding that it is the growth of the eternal families we are in that increases the glory of God.

If that is correct, wouldn't there be a finite number of spirit children, and seemingly trouble for "eternal" progression, or does this lead us back to the names of God in D&C 19?

Or perhaps I am,

A) Thinking too much,

B) Have flawed premises,

C) Both

D) Just have to wait...

Thanks for your thoughts!

There is one piece of knowledge that can be obtained over time and at the same time have all knowledge. That is, to know that something is done when it is done. With the passage of time, things in the future may be spiritually planned or created but there is a value to God in not just knowing about them but actually bringing them to pass. This is why we are told that the glory of God is "to bring to pass ...".

What happens when something is "brought to pass"? It is realized. The realization of an act is different from just knowing someone's potential. Many are called but few are chosen. Not everyone's potential is met. The glory of God is to bring about that potential and not just claim it is possible in the future. There is value in the doing and finishing the work. If that were not the case then there would be no need for this world. God could have already judged us based on our potential alone. If there is value in this then God cannot say that something is done until it is "brought to pass". He cannot have knowledge of something "brought to pass" until it passes. That is where there is progression, in the bringing to pass.

[mikbone]

I don't necessarily think that finite is a true opposite of infinite.

Finite - describes a measurable static amount.

Infinite in a theological sense has a much broader meaning.

[MarginOfError]

I think it's worth observing that when Joseph Smith was recording what we now have as the Book of Abraham, he may have been seeing things that escape adequate description. We sometimes talk about the difficulty ancient prophets may have had trying to describe airplanes or tanks to their contemporaries (if they did see these in vision). I imagine Smith suffered a similar challenge in trying to explain the organization of the universe. I'm hesitant to take the words too literally for that reason.

[Traveler]

It is always interesting to me to see how scientifically defined terms are used by the religious community. There are a number of terms involved in this thread but the two most prominent are "intelligence" and "infinite"

As an expert and consultant in artificial intelligence with application to robotic in manufacturing - I may have some input. But we are going to have to get over some rather misleading religious notions.

In the scientific community we define intelligence as "the ability to learn and alter responses". Thus we can say a robot possesses artificial intelligence if it is able to learn from events and alter it response. But this also implies that intelligence has means to sense the environment, project possible outcome, remember past experience and choose from multiple possibilities.

From a religious stand point - can we consider if G-d is intelligent? The problem here is if we are to say, "No" then the assumptions is that G-d is stupid - because we all know that stupidity is the absence of intelligence. But if we say G-d is intelligent we then that conflicts with the ability to learn and alter responses? With what we understand of our universe we will very quickly paint ourselves into a corner we cannot get out of trying to make much sense of such terms in relation to G-d. LDS theology is the only religious doctrine I have encountered that can maintain some rational to all this stuff without creating contradictions that require fuzzy magic kind of unexplainable logic to get out of this religious labyrinth with one's sanity intact. In essence we understand that G-d is the master of this universe - so we can trust him not to make a mistake in relationship to our existence. Not just in this mortal existence but in obtaining what is religiously called "eternal life". But because G-d is intelligent - he is learning things of higher or divine place. Which may mean of more dimensional space in scientific terms. So in terms of our "condition" and place G-d is all knowing - but beyond mortal possibility it may be possible that G-d is learning of things that currently do not apply to our state. Therefore, G-d is both all knowing and at the same time - able to learn. But as I have said - LDS is the only theology that I have encountered that can deal with the full ramifications of an intelligent (spiritual) G-d.

Another term of problem is the word infinite. In mathematics infinite is a theory that is easy to deal with. We can even have different kinds of infinite that theoretically have different magnitudes or values. But in physics (real applications in our universe) there is no such thing as infinite. Infinite does not really exist in finite reality. Infinite does not exist in our universe - as we define it. And so the universe is turned upside down with things like "Black Holes" that are unreasonably defined with physicis that is in essence undefined because mathematically values that must be finite end up defined as infinite. Black Holes are not the only problem in dealing with mathematical theoretical discussions of infinite - electrons (bosons in general) also can produce infinite problems. But all this is another discussion.

I guess that what I am trying to say is that we cannot use the standard definitions because the are not really broad enough but we cannot use anything else because we just do not have the terms to be reasonably descriptive. Therefore we are left with only one last possibility as I see it. That is, to use the scripture method from Isaiah. We learn line upon line upon line and precept upon precept upon precept; seeing only what is within our finite vantage - and then moving beyond. Which bring me to my final point - which is only defined with LDS theology. That intelligence is unbounded and that as we learn and modify our behavior we not only become like G-d but we become G-ds. And thus the definition of damnation becomes that which has limits and is bounded.

The Traveler

Edited September 10, 2013 by Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

It is always interesting to me to see how scientifically defined terms are used by the religious community. There are a number of terms involved in this thread but the two most prominent are "intelligence" and "infinite"

As an expert and consultant in artificial intelligence with application to robotic in manufacturing - I may have some input. But we are going to have to get over some rather misleading religious notions.

In the scientific community we define intelligence as "the ability to learn and alter responses". Thus we can say a robot possesses artificial intelligence if it is able to learn from events and alter it response. But this also implies that intelligence has means to sense the environment, project possible outcome, remember past experience and choose from multiple possibilities.

From a religious stand point - can we consider if G-d is intelligent? The problem here is if we are to say, "No" then the assumptions is that G-d is stupid - because we all know that stupidity is the absence of intelligence. But if we say G-d is intelligent we then that conflicts with the ability to learn and alter responses? With what we understand of our universe we will very quickly paint ourselves into a corner we cannot get out of trying to make much sense of such terms in relation to G-d. LDS theology is the only religious doctrine I have encountered that can maintain some rational to all this stuff without creating contradictions that require fuzzy magic kind of unexplainable logic to get out of this religious labyrinth with one's sanity intact. In essence we understand that G-d is the master of this universe - so we can trust him not to make a mistake in relationship to our existence. Not just in this mortal existence but in obtaining what is religiously called "eternal life". But because G-d is intelligent - he is learning things of higher or divine place. Which may mean of more dimensional space in scientific terms. So in terms of our "condition" and place G-d is all knowing - but beyond mortal possibility it may be possible that G-d is learning of things that currently do not apply to our state. Therefore, G-d is both all knowing and at the same time - able to learn. But as I have said - LDS is the only theology that I have encountered that can deal with the full ramifications of an intelligent (spiritual) G-d.

Another term of problem is the word infinite. In mathematics infinite is a theory that is easy to deal with. We can even have different kinds of infinite that theoretically have different magnitudes or values. But in physics (real applications in our universe) there is no such thing as infinite. Infinite does not really exist in finite reality. Infinite does not exist in our universe - as we define it. And so the universe is turned upside down with things like "Black Holes" that are unreasonably defined with physicis that is in essence undefined because mathematically values that must be finite end up defined as infinite. Black Holes are not the only problem in dealing with mathematical theoretical discussions of infinite - electrons (bosons in general) also can produce infinite problems. But all this is another discussion.

I guess that what I am trying to say is that we cannot use the standard definitions because the are not really broad enough but we cannot use anything else because we just do not have the terms to be reasonably descriptive. Therefore we are left with only one last possibility as I see it. That is, to use the scripture method from Isaiah. We learn line upon line upon line and precept upon precept upon precept; seeing only what is within our finite vantage - and then moving beyond. Which bring me to my final point - which is only defined with LDS theology. That intelligence is unbounded and that as we learn and modify our behavior we not only become like G-d but we become G-ds. And thus the definition of damnation becomes that which has limits and is bounded.

The Traveler

On top of all that (which I totally agree with), all we can do is apply the mortal condition to the Celestial realm. The method of learning and the manner is which knowledge is obtained in the Celestial realm is unknown to us.

It may be like someone from the 1200s trying to explain how a 12 year old might look up an answer to a question on the internet. Our understanding of "artificial intelligence" and organic intelligence (the brain) is a study of things that may be unique to the mortal realm. This is the only situation that we know of in which our dual being status is at odds with itself. When the spirit and body work more in unison in the next realm, the method of learning may be far from our current methods. For example, how is it possible for Jesus to understand the sin when he does not sin? How can Jesus know of the sins of another that occurred when he was not physically around at the time of the sin?

Obviously, there is a lot more to gathering information and understanding than we can comprehend right now. One, I think, very important aspect of learning that we understand very little of is vicarious learning. We get a taste of it when our loved ones do something great and we feel their joy. Or when a ward member shares a testimony that touches our spirit. I think that form of learning, gathering information from someone else' experience as if it was our own will be a very important aspect of learning that we cannot really fully appreciate right now other than through the example of Christ. This is probably why love is so important, that is the key to vicarious learning. One thing that happens by the age of 8, the age of accountability, is a more developed ability to place one self in someone else' shoes which is a higher intelligence, human feature. Until robots can love and demonstrate ability to put their self in someone else' shoes, "artificial intelligence" is very far from the way God would have us learn, loving one's neighbor as their self. The concept of "self" and "love" and "faith" in an instructor of the method are the first lessons. ... that goes way beyond just an ability to alter responses.

[mnn727]

D&C 92: 29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.

There is a basic difference between the upper limit of my intelligence and the number of intelligence's (potential people) there are. The two are separate. Just because there is a limit to my personal intelligence does not mean there is a limit to the number of intelligence's there are. -- There may be a limit to the number of intelligence's (potential people) however nothing has ever been revealed about that or even hinted at as far as I know.

[Traveler]

On top of all that (which I totally agree with), all we can do is apply the mortal condition to the Celestial realm. The method of learning and the manner is which knowledge is obtained in the Celestial realm is unknown to us.

Good to hear from you Seminary. I love your in sites because it inspires me to think. Having considered you post, I believe the quest for understanding (thinking), even in this very mortal conditions is tightly coupled with conditions of the Celestial realm. For example we are counseled that it is primarily in this life that we must prepare to live with G-d. If what we learn in this life is not tightly coupled with what we are able to learn in the Celestial Kingdom - I do not believe this life would be important.

One of my favorite techniques in art is the imbedding of a hidden image within an image and also what was called the "eye" images that hide a 3 dimensional image. One of my favorite stories about the selling of art was a painting sold in the 60's (highest at the time in a US auction) that surprised art critics. The painting was about 4 feet wide and 12 feet high. The entire painting was painted black. One critic closely examining the painting discovered that the canvas was pains takingly painted with very short and thin strokes and a very fine brush. The also noticed that some brush strokes had been reversed. Knowing the reversing the brush strokes would alter the lighting on the painting the critic began looking at the picture at different angles. Finely when the value appeared to the critic when they got down on their knees and look up at the painting to see a image stand out in the light of Christ on the cross.

It may be like someone from the 1200s trying to explain how a 12 year old might look up an answer to a question on the internet. Our understanding of "artificial intelligence" and organic intelligence (the brain) is a study of things that may be unique to the mortal realm. This is the only situation that we know of in which our dual being status is at odds with itself. When the spirit and body work more in unison in the next realm, the method of learning may be far from our current methods. For example, how is it possible for Jesus to understand the sin when he does not sin? How can Jesus know of the sins of another that occurred when he was not physically around at the time of the sin?

Obviously, there is a lot more to gathering information and understanding than we can comprehend right now. One, I think, very important aspect of learning that we understand very little of is vicarious learning. We get a taste of it when our loved ones do something great and we feel their joy. Or when a ward member shares a testimony that touches our spirit. I think that form of learning, gathering information from someone else' experience as if it was our own will be a very important aspect of learning that we cannot really fully appreciate right now other than through the example of Christ. This is probably why love is so important, that is the key to vicarious learning. One thing that happens by the age of 8, the age of accountability, is a more developed ability to place one self in someone else' shoes which is a higher intelligence, human feature. Until robots can love and demonstrate ability to put their self in someone else' shoes, "artificial intelligence" is very far from the way God would have us learn, loving one's neighbor as their self. The concept of "self" and "love" and "faith" in an instructor of the method are the first lessons. ... that goes way beyond just an ability to alter responses.

I am inclined to believe that the experience of each individual in this life is brilliantly matched to what the individual needs to learn the most moving into eternal life.

As far as artificial intelligence - we are currently on par with insects - you are correct we have much to discover scientifically with artificial intelligence - but we are making progress.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

D&C 92: 29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.

There is a basic difference between the upper limit of my intelligence and the number of intelligence's (potential people) there are. The two are separate. Just because there is a limit to my personal intelligence does not mean there is a limit to the number of intelligence's there are. -- There may be a limit to the number of intelligence's (potential people) however nothing has ever been revealed about that or even hinted at as far as I know.

I agree that the two seem to be separate - but are you sure that there is not something that might couple to two and create a relationship between the two? For example - does the existence of G-d affect both the quality and quantity of intelligence?

The Traveler

[mnn727]

I agree that the two seem to be separate - but are you sure that there is not something that might couple to two and create a relationship between the two? For example - does the existence of G-d affect both the quality and quantity of intelligence?

The Traveler

I'm pretty sure that the existence of God and His interaction with mankind does affect (or has affected) the quality.

As far as the affecting the quantity? who knows beside God and He hasn't mentioned it.

[Seminarysnoozer]

D&C 92: 29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.

There is a basic difference between the upper limit of my intelligence and the number of intelligence's (potential people) there are. The two are separate. Just because there is a limit to my personal intelligence does not mean there is a limit to the number of intelligence's there are. -- There may be a limit to the number of intelligence's (potential people) however nothing has ever been revealed about that or even hinted at as far as I know.

They may not be so separated when one ponders the idea that the glory and work of God is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. (calling attention to the words - bring to pass). There is value to God in seeing that something is accomplished more than just creating something spiritually, there is value to making it happen. He cannot know that something is completed until it is completed. At the moment of achievement or completion of one of His children, in other words, the moment they achieve immortality or eternal life, there is something learned. He has learned that that individual has achieved immortality or eternal life. Which is more than just knowing of the potential or even the future action. Appreciating this comes with understanding the phrase "to bring to pass".

This life is a test of seeing if we will do the things God asks us to do. Why is there a need to test the ability of us to carry out the act over just knowing that we would do something if asked? ... maybe because there actually is value in the doing. ...maybe because God's glory is based in the 'bringing to pass'.

I am happy to know my children have been baptized. There was a change in my intelligence and glory the moment my children were baptized that was added to my being the moment the act was done that wasn't there even minutes before the act was done. Two minutes before they were baptized, you could have asked me "do I know they will be baptized?" And I would have said "yes". But if you would have asked me two minutes before their baptism, "do you know that they are baptized", I would have had to say "no", even though I knew they would be in just a few minutes. What difference does it make? I am not entirely sure but I do know I felt different knowing my children have been baptized from just knowing they likely would. I am assuming God is the same way with us. ....there is value in the "bringing to pass".

God is a just God and maybe this all has to do with Him being just. Justice has to be served. The law has to be satisfied. There is intelligence gained in knowing that the law has been satisfied over knowing that it will be some day. Knowing or learning of that time and time again in one eternal round is the progression related to the number of intelligences. Knowing that for each of them the law has been satisfied is a growing intelligence.

Edited September 17, 2013 by Seminarysnoozer

[Traveler]

...

This life is a test of seeing if we will do the things God asks us to do. Why is there a need to test the ability of us to carry out the act over just knowing that we would do something if asked? ... maybe because there actually is value in the doing. ...maybe because God's glory is based in the 'bringing to pass'.

This little paragraph caught my attention. It has to do with our current education and the purpose of testing - especially unit testing. One of my biggest disappointments with our educational system is the use of tests. I dislike tests as the means to determine a grade for a class. I say this from the perspective that as a student I learned "tricks" to not just pass tests but the ace them. I discovered that I could get "A's" and not really understand the material. At the time I thought getting the grade and not understanding the material was the goal in education.

In the real world I have developed a much better understanding of testing. As a engineer I create and do testing to determine the effectiveness and parameters a particular "thing" that I desire to use and the conditions under which I can use it. I do not test stuff so I can say, "Oh, this thing is an A or that thing a B." Part of the purpose of a test is to know how well the thing works and under what condition it fails. But mostly I test to determine what changes need to occur in order the make the thing meet the needs for what it is intended. I test to see if and how much I need to modify for it to work within my parameters. So I make the necessary changes and test again - until it works and performs all the prescribed tasks.

It is for this reason that I believe we are tested in this life - not to prove that we are Celestial but to determine where we are on the path to being a Celestial being. Thus I believe testing is not to prove what we are but to discover what we have yet to learn and apply. I think that G-d allows us to retake our tests until we either get it right or give up and accept what we have learned, perfected and applied.

Thus the purpose is not to avoid any failure but to recognize failure and make a modification (repent) and retake the test. I am disappointed with religions that teach that all that is necessary or sufficient is to repent and then teach that no retesting is necessary. As a consultant I tell my customers - if it ain't tested it does not work and if they want to market stuff that does not work then do not test it. But there is one more very important thing about testing that in essence has already been said. Everything that has been tested and determined to work is all that works - just because something has been tested and proven to work does not mean that anything else works - I am amazed how people think that testing something means everything else also works.

The Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

This little paragraph caught my attention. It has to do with our current education and the purpose of testing - especially unit testing. One of my biggest disappointments with our educational system is the use of tests. I dislike tests as the means to determine a grade for a class. I say this from the perspective that as a student I learned "tricks" to not just pass tests but the ace them. I discovered that I could get "A's" and not really understand the material. At the time I thought getting the grade and not understanding the material was the goal in education.

In the real world I have developed a much better understanding of testing. As a engineer I create and do testing to determine the effectiveness and parameters a particular "thing" that I desire to use and the conditions under which I can use it. I do not test stuff so I can say, "Oh, this thing is an A or that thing a B." Part of the purpose of a test is to know how well the thing works and under what condition it fails. But mostly I test to determine what changes need to occur in order the make the thing meet the needs for what it is intended. I test to see if and how much I need to modify for it to work within my parameters. So I make the necessary changes and test again - until it works and performs all the prescribed tasks.

It is for this reason that I believe we are tested in this life - not to prove that we are Celestial but to determine where we are on the path to being a Celestial being. Thus I believe testing is not to prove what we are but to discover what we have yet to learn and apply. I think that G-d allows us to retake our tests until we either get it right or give up and accept what we have learned, perfected and applied.

Thus the purpose is not to avoid any failure but to recognize failure and make a modification (repent) and retake the test. I am disappointed with religions that teach that all that is necessary or sufficient is to repent and then teach that no retesting is necessary. As a consultant I tell my customers - if it ain't tested it does not work and if they want to market stuff that does not work then do not test it. But there is one more very important thing about testing that in essence has already been said. Everything that has been tested and determined to work is all that works - just because something has been tested and proven to work does not mean that anything else works - I am amazed how people think that testing something means everything else also works.

The Traveler

I completely agree with the process of refinement that you outline here.

As it states in Gospel Principles, (paraphrasing) there is a need for us to learn by faith the principles of patience, endurance and charity. To me there is no doubt that there is a process by which those things are learned that cannot be done without being put into a position where faith is needed, mortality.

However, I think the discussion was more along the lines of how God's intelligence can continue to grow. In that light, I was suggesting that even for God there is a value in the "bringing to pass". When I bake a sheet of cookies, it takes refinement, mixing and baking by heat to make it happen even though I don't have to go through any of those steps personally, I have benefited from the materials going through those steps. God does not require any further refinement although somehow He gleans glory and joy from our refinement. Therefore, the process of refinement (vicariously) allows God to have continued, perpetual, infinite increase in intelligence. It is in our doing and all that He has done to make it happen that realizes the joy. It has to actually be done, not just saying it could be done (from God's perspective). He may know exactly how the perfect batch of cookies will turn out but that is not the same as actually baking them and then learning that it is done.

To me, the words "bring to pass" refers to a necessary step in the glory and eternal glory and happiness of God that cannot be passed over as if it means nothing. The point being the actual realization of the act is different than simply knowing how all things will turn out, for God. This must be an eternal principle. If not, then there is no reason for our existence because God could have had equal glory from simply saying, "I could have all these spiritual children and all their associated accomplishments if I wanted to." And there would be no added benefit in the actual carrying out of the act. Why actually do it if there is no change once it is done? God would not waste His energy that way, I do not believe in a God who does purposeless or valueless acts.

The reason we need to learn faith and charity is because that is the method in which God can glean continued joy vicariously. In other words, increases in intelligence are not necessarily referring to a quantified set of facts but refers to the knowing that an advancement has been made by ones that are connected via faith and charity, loving one's neighbor as your self. In that way, anything done by someone else with that connection is added to everyone with the connection. Just like when my kindergartner learns to read, my happiness increased even though I know how to read. There was no added facts or refinement on my part other than the learning of my daughters accomplishment and that brought joy. That is magnified via the characteristics of faith and charity.

The set of facts has already been learned. We spent ages upon ages learning facts before this life while in the presence of God. There is not one piece of secular information that one can learn in this life that was not already learned in the presence of God. We push forward with learning because we are learning how to learn while keeping an eye single to the glory of God. In other words, we learn new things while in mortality so that we can learn the lessons of faith, endurance, patience and charity which are tools for vicarious joy in the future.

Edited September 18, 2013 by Seminarysnoozer

[Traveler]

I completely agree with the process of refinement that you outline here.

As it states in Gospel Principles, (paraphrasing) there is a need for us to learn by faith the principles of patience, endurance and charity. To me there is no doubt that there is a process by which those things are learned that cannot be done without being put into a position where faith is needed, mortality.

However, I think the discussion was more along the lines of how God's intelligence can continue to grow. In that light, I was suggesting that even for God there is a value in the "bringing to pass". When I bake a sheet of cookies, it takes refinement, mixing and baking by heat to make it happen even though I don't have to go through any of those steps personally, I have benefited from the materials going through those steps. God does not require any further refinement although somehow He gleans glory and joy from our refinement. Therefore, the process of refinement (vicariously) allows God to have continued, perpetual, infinite increase in intelligence. It is in our doing and all that He has done to make it happen that realizes the joy. It has to actually be done, not just saying it could be done (from God's perspective). He may know exactly how the perfect batch of cookies will turn out but that is not the same as actually baking them and then learning that it is done.

To me, the words "bring to pass" refers to a necessary step in the glory and eternal glory and happiness of God that cannot be passed over as if it means nothing. The point being the actual realization of the act is different than simply knowing how all things will turn out, for God. This must be an eternal principle. If not, then there is no reason for our existence because God could have had equal glory from simply saying, "I could have all these spiritual children and all their associated accomplishments if I wanted to." And there would be no added benefit in the actual carrying out of the act. Why actually do it if there is no change once it is done? God would not waste His energy that way, I do not believe in a God who does purposeless or valueless acts.

The reason we need to learn faith and charity is because that is the method in which God can glean continued joy vicariously. In other words, increases in intelligence are not necessarily referring to a quantified set of facts but refers to the knowing that an advancement has been made by ones that are connected via faith and charity, loving one's neighbor as your self. In that way, anything done by someone else with that connection is added to everyone with the connection. Just like when my kindergartner learns to read, my happiness increased even though I know how to read. There was no added facts or refinement on my part other than the learning of my daughters accomplishment and that brought joy. That is magnified via the characteristics of faith and charity.

The set of facts has already been learned. We spent ages upon ages learning facts before this life while in the presence of God. There is not one piece of secular information that one can learn in this life that was not already learned in the presence of God. We push forward with learning because we are learning how to learn while keeping an eye single to the glory of God. In other words, we learn new things while in mortality so that we can learn the lessons of faith, endurance, patience and charity which are tools for vicarious joy in the future.

There are two point I think can represent benefits to the intelligence of G-d in creating man:

First Point has to do with my previous post concerning tests. That is when a student takes a test the proctor can determine what the student has learned. That can be valuable in determining what the students needs to be taught to gain a better understanding. But as several students take a test the proctor is able to learn and polish the lesson. Not the change any facts but to be more effective in teaching. Thus the trials of man become the lessons of G-d. This is similar to your concept with a slight variance in point of view.

Second point has to an old topic of the hive mind and the idea that as individuals work together for a common goal - regardless of how superior one intelligence is to others all benefit in the shared hive mind. This includes the idea that the whole is greater than the sum of all parts. By the very nature that G-d increases our intelligence and light - because we are one with G-d that increase adds to the Light of G-d as well as all others that will also benefit by the intelligent union.

The Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

There are two point I think can represent benefits to the intelligence of G-d in creating man:

First Point has to do with my previous post concerning tests. That is when a student takes a test the proctor can determine what the student has learned. That can be valuable in determining what the students needs to be taught to gain a better understanding. But as several students take a test the proctor is able to learn and polish the lesson. Not the change any facts but to be more effective in teaching. Thus the trials of man become the lessons of G-d. This is similar to your concept with a slight variance in point of view.

Second point has to an old topic of the hive mind and the idea that as individuals work together for a common goal - regardless of how superior one intelligence is to others all benefit in the shared hive mind. This includes the idea that the whole is greater than the sum of all parts. By the very nature that G-d increases our intelligence and light - because we are one with G-d that increase adds to the Light of G-d as well as all others that will also benefit by the intelligent union.

The Traveler

Thanks for your response.

I think God's presumed ability to see the future would preclude him from having to need any feedback to make adjustments to teaching methods. But, of course, our actions determine what is taught and what is given. Just like there are some precious truths that maybe could have been given to Joseph Smith but we are just going to have to wait until we are more righteous as a whole. I am not seeing how any of that would change the possibility of finite intelligence.

I think there is one premise that has to be agreed upon or argued in order for us to really affect something that God learns for the first time and that is the idea that time is linear. If time is a whole or acts like a whole then there is nothing that can change even learning. However, if there is a past, present and future as a fixed law then it is possible that the present is different from the past and the future will be different from the present. I think that premise has to be in place to allow for any "progression" of intelligence. That, of course, does not mean that viewing different times and events is not accessible. It just means that one cannot say that something is 'brought to pass' until it has passed. This is why I go back to the phrase "to bring to pass..."

In other words, I do not know that something is done until it is done. I can say that it will happen but I could not say that it is done until it is actually accomplished. For example, I could say that I will die but I cannot say that "I have died" (physical separation of mortal body from spirit) at this moment. The issue is whether there is something "learned" by saying it has happened that is not possible to claim until it happens. There are many words in the gospel that imply this type of thinking. For example, inheritance. An inheritance is a potential ownership that takes place at a future time. Once inheritance is obtained it usually isn't referred to as an inheritance any more, just ownership. The words of satisfying laws and blessings predicated on obedience also imply that something has to be done in order to receive a higher state. The higher state is not reached just by saying there is a potential in the future for such things. So, the moment it is satisfied, the moment the words are spoken, 'job well done' there is a learning that the job is done, that the thing is 'brought to pass'. Even Joseph Smith gives the metaphor of climbing the ladder. Once all the truths are learned, all the secular and experiential understanding is had, the steps of the ladder may be, 'bringing to pass' righteousness. The rungs of the ladder require a linear reference, above and below the current step.