longview

That the spiritual being with its self-awareness and amazing capacity and marvelous attributes enables the physical body to perform so much better than its corresponding brain neurons would suggest. Don't you think?

I used it for illustrative purposes. I was letting @the narrator know of the wonders of nature. Such as the amazingly small size of the brain of the Bee Hummingbird (size of a grain of rice) but very capable of doing complex things with many wonderful attributes. This was in line with the discussion on the spirit body taking possession of "clay tabernacles." I believe it is. I was following up on the spirit/body enhancements and providing additional evidence of spiritual "self-awareness" with marvelous new layers of attributes.

Many of your questions are TOO needle-focused for my taste. So I am sharing my thoughts by walking you thru basic steps in a progressive manner.

You are justified in having concerns. I actually did see some errors in this one but it was not too serious so that we can all gain from pondering new perspectives.

My next step is to examine the brain capacity of the Bee Hummingbird with the help of chatGPT: He frequently suggested that animals: obey divine law more faithfully than humans retain harmony between spirit and body better than humans possess “knowledge inherited from pre-mortal realms” b. Spirit and body coordination Nibley tied the astounding precision of animals—migration, navigation, sacrificial behavior, fidelity—to the spirit-body interface, not merely neurons. 2. James E. Talmage In Jesus the Christ and The Articles of Faith, Talmage made several clear doctrinal points: a. Animals possess spirits Talmage states plainly: All living things have spirits created before the world. These spirits correspond to their physical bodies (“each after its kind”). b. Instinct reflects pre-mortal endowment Talmage taught that the remarkable abilities of animals are: partly spirit-derived intelligence expressed through the body “according to its capacity” This means a bee hummingbird or a bee itself: has limited neural hardware but its spirit carries eternal identity, order, and inclination c. Obedience and harmony Talmage notes that animals obey divine order more consistently than humans, fulfilling the measure of their creation with exactness. Their minds operate in concert with the divine laws embedded in their spiritual nature. 3. Orson Pratt Orson Pratt offered some of the most detailed early LDS philosophical reflections on spirit and intelligence. a. Every spirit is composed of “living, thinking particles” This is one of Pratt's most significant ideas: The spirit itself is a thinking, perceiving, acting organism. Its intelligence is inherent, not produced by the mortal brain. b. The physical brain is an instrument of expression Pratt explained that: The spirit has its own faculties The brain is a temporary tool allowing expression in mortality Differences in animal brains merely limit their outward range, not the origin of their intelligence Meaning: A tiny bird with a tiny brain is not limited in spiritual intelligence—only in the elaborateness of physical expression. c. Instinct = spirit memory Pratt taught that what humans call “instinct” is often: “knowledge gained in the pre-mortal state.” Thus migration patterns, nesting behavior, mating displays, and territorial strategies: may be spirit habits learned long before mortality re-expressed through physical pathways 4. John A. Widtsoe Widtsoe integrated science with LDS theology more explicitly than most Apostles. a. Animals learn, remember, and choose Widtsoe emphasized: genuine learning in animals moral growth appropriate to their sphere spiritual individuality b. Instinct is spiritual intelligence He saw instinctive behaviors as: “intelligence expressed through a limited body” “spirit identity working through earthly conditions” c. Brain complexity is not the source of intelligence For Widtsoe: intelligence is eternal the brain merely channels it differing brain sizes produce different capacities, not intelligence itself 5. Other LDS figures (Joseph Fielding Smith, Brigham Young) Joseph Fielding Smith All animals have spirits Animals will be resurrected Their intelligence is real, not automaton-like Brigham Young The spirit forms the body The spiritual template is the true organizational basis Life is fundamentally spiritual, not biochemical Synthesis: What LDS Thinkers Would Say About the Smallest Bird Brain If you asked Nibley, Pratt, or Talmage: “How can a bird with 20–40 million neurons perform miraculous navigation and instinctive complexity?” Their likely unified response: The spirit is the primary seat of intelligence, not the physical brain. The brain is a translator, not the originator, of thought or instinct. A bird's astonishing abilities arise from: eternal identity spiritual memory pre-mortal endowment divine law working through physical structures Neurons set output limits, not intelligence limits. The harmony of animal behavior reflects: “the spirit acting through its natural organization without rebellion” (a theme common to both Nibley and Talmage)

Lets start with the basics: Think of a baby forming in the belly of the mother after conception. Ask yourself if that baby has everything it needs to grow up to be an adult. If it does, then its brain is sufficient to deal with the challenges of life. But if the brain is NOT sophisticated enough, then it requires a spirit component to interface with the brain to be more effective.

You seem to be skipping over his point: No. This is the fulcrum of the debate. So intelligences=spirits in this verse, so they are persons, etc. (hopefully I have this right and it will show I am actually understanding Ben’s comments and not pushing his words through my assumptions too hard) McGuire is insisting that the "self-awareness" began in the First Estate with the creation of spirit bodies. He has NOT explained away the implications of the plural form of intelligences. The plural form strongly assert the individuality of each self-aware intelligence (in this context referring to personhood, not attributes). See Abr 3:21 "for I (God) rule ... over all the intelligences thine eyes have seen from the beginning; I came down in the beginning in the midst of all the intelligences thou hast seen." God interacted with all those INDIVIDUALS (like a man talking with people). Those intelligences in whatever form they were in, can NOT have a beginning of self-awareness or sentience at ANY finite point. When Heavenly Parents formed the spirit bodies in the First Estate, those bodies had NO self-awareness. The only way to animate the spirit bodies is to insert pre-existing self-aware intelligences (that never had a beginning of self-awareness) into those spirit bodies. Those spirit bodies had a definite beginning point BUT were simply shells. This is a similar process to spirit children acquiring physical bodies in mortality, the Second Estate.

There are at least four stages of existence: Intelligences - sentient beings that have never been created/organized (uncreated, have no beginnings, co-eternal with God) appearance unknown prior to the First Estate Spirit Children of Heavenly Parents - The First Estate - spirit bodies formed in the image of God (human appearance) - Intelligences are given these to inhabit and acquire greater attributes Mortality - The Second Estate - physical bodies formed in the womb of humans - spirit children enter into earthly babies to inhabit (Brigham Young called it the quickening) - these bodies are referred to in the scriptures as tabernacles of clay Resurrection - there is a probationary state in the spirit world where spirit children go after earthly death of the physical body - after making resolution and repentance and various other preparations, spirit children are again given physical bodies "not a hair shall be lost" in an uncorrupted glorified state (referred to in the scriptures as the Three Degrees of Glory)

No, they aren't. They are dealing with the problem that occurred because Joseph Smith used the term spirit and intelligence (at least in this sense) anonymously early on. That is, Joseph Smith never envisioned some sort of intelligence as a personhood that exists apart from the spirit. Your use of absolutes regarding church history is unsupportable. It undermines your credibility. I read @Calm's link to bycommonconsent and found an interesting question in the comment section. He makes a good point: 'But doesn’t the plural use of the term “intelligences” in Abraham seem inconsistent with the idea of undifferentiated spirit element? The term “intelligences” is a strange way to refer to spirit unorganized.' I am not contradicting the teachings of the Church - you are misunderstanding them. Nowhere does the Church create this distinction between personhood and attributes that you are presenting here. If they did, we wouldn't even need to have this discussion. In fact, we don't even see this word "personhood" used in these discussions from the Church. But strangely enough, you stubbornly ignore President Joseph Fielding Smith's direct statement: "This intelligence combined with the spirit constitutes a spiritual identity or individual”. Terms "spiritual identity" and "individual" DOUBLES down on the personhood of sentient intelligences. ALL BEFORE the First Estate and the organization of spirit bodies. Yet you continue to contradict Pres. Smith. Your historical references interpretations are mostly bogus. Do you see the irony? You are using the plural form of intelligences. They are persons, self-aware, sentient and progressing. You continue to disregard statements by prophets and scriptures that spirit children are indisputably "uncreated" meaning that their spirit bodies did NOT start having self-awareness in the First Estate. Preexisting intelligences came into the First Estate to gain spirit bodies. A glorious enhancement with marvelous attributes.

You are twisting their words. They actually make dual use of the term intelligence, both the personhood and the attributes. The lesson manual linked by @Calm make frequent use of intelligences to refer to their personhoods. And it also make frequent use of the words intelligent and intelligence to refer to ACQUIRED attributes. From the lesson: You are directly contradicting the teachings of the church. You keep failing to maintain careful distinctions between personhood and attributes. Pay attention to the context. It changes within the same paragraph and even within the same sentence. But it is clear to the careful reader to make unambiguous distinctions between personhood and attributes. President Joseph Fielding Smith teaches that intelligence (personhood the REAL eternal part of man) was combined with the spirit (the spirit body provided by Heavenly Parents as a wondrous attribute). Just as the spirit child of God has obtained a wondrous mortal physical body. A tremendous blessing all around!

I have no further insights into this seeming Great Paradox. But I am sure that God is NOT distressed and He has a plan. His thoughts are higher than our thoughts. We have NO idea how the universe is structured. His mathematics is mind-blowing.

This is not TRUE doctrine as taught by the LDS Church. I am not making the wrong difference here. The challenge you have is that you are trying to create a distinction where none exists. The LDS Church uses the term 'creation' to discuss the beginning of our spiritual existence. I am perfectly fine sticking with their language. No. I am not implying that the "universe" is infinite. In fact I explicitly suggested that the universe was finite. What I am saying is that your definitions are wrong. There is no pool of "intelligences" that are candidates. There is only a pool of spirits (that have been created or organized - it really doesn't matter which term you use). And God continues to create. I keep telling you that I find your distinctions to be wrong. I will quote again from the LDS Church's material: We are created - and we are organized to receive intelligence. The intelligence that we receive is eternal. But just as we can receive intelligence, we can also lose it. The intelligence is not our personhood (as you seem to be suggesting). It is what gives us the potential for divinity. And only when we have enough of it can we progress further. It is in this sense that we could be arranged in the pre-existence by our intelligence, with God having a greater intelligence than the rest of us (as described in Abraham 3). To explain it in a different way, God doesn't take some personal intelligence and then give it a spiritual body - rather, he creates a spiritual person and gives it the capacity to receive intelligence. You are seriously wrong to insist that a spirit gained his self-awareness in the First Estate. Read carefully Abraham 3:18 ...if there be two spirits, and one shall be more intelligent than the other, yet these two spirits, notwithstanding one is more intelligent than the other, have no beginning; they existed before, they shall have no end, they shall exist after, for they are gnolaum, or eternal. This absolutely proves the self-awareness of intelligences BEFORE the First Estate. Also, there is a wonderful transformation of the person transitioning into the First Estate.

I absolutely DO believe that intelligences are "some sort of individuals that have eternally existed." I think your problem is muddling various definitions of intelligence. Distinctions need to be made between personhood (self-awareness, sentience) and attributes (having different levels of knowledge, wisdom, capabilities, powers, etc). This requires a more careful reading/study/pondering of various terminologies and abstractions. Need to avoid overlapping concepts and making clear distinctions. This reference can be restated as TRUE doctrine: intelligences were invited by Heavenly Parents to participate in the Plan of Happiness. Accordingly they became spirit children thus acquiring new and more powerful attributes in ADDITION to their previous capabilities and RETAINING their own self-awareness and memory. This was the First Estate. Before the Earth was created (organized) spiritually and physically. Your problem is making the wrong difference between the words organized and created. This is similar to the doctrinal disputations among denominations and creeds that argued whether earth was created ex nihilo (out of nothing) or organized using existing materials (whether spiritual or physical). You need to be careful with your definitions. You seem to imply that the "universe" is infinite but the number of intelligences (persons) is finite. This will cause the doctrine of Eternal Increase to come to a CRASHING halt at some point. Because the candidates from among the intelligences to take part in the next "First Estate" will be depleted. In part? How do you mean? Again, you are confusing aspects of personhood and attributes. Re-read my points above for those distinctions. My belief is that even among the sons of perdition, they still retain some of the "new" attributes they gained from the First Estate and/or the Second Estate. Thus having benefited in becoming more capable than their original self before entering the First Estate. Remember how God told Cain that he would "rule" over Lucifer? Because Cain will still gain an immortal physical body (in the resurrection of the "unjust") and Lucifer and his henchmen will only have their spirit bodies that they obtained in the First Estate. No. This reflects your confusion of the mind. You cannot escape the doctrine of eternal increase. I am happy to discuss any of the assumptions you attribute to me. But I agree, I do NOT always articulate to perfection (another way of being complete). Just like in the Global Warming Hysteria, consensus does NOT guarantee proof. You make a great point. This could be called the Great Paradox. But I have a firm belief that our Heavenly Parents (plus all the generations of the Gods) will NOT be discouraged or be despairing. The work MUST go on. Because God's LOVE is never ending.

I think you misread the last two phrases.

Agree. Do you agree that each "intelligence" has self-awareness and has no beginning or ending (co-eternal with God)? Do you believe that there are infinite numbers of intelligences? How else will the Plan of Happiness continue with endless generations, unending Eternal Rounds? Although we do not know what appearances the intelligences had before the First Estate, do you agree that their spirit bodies were made in the image of God? Anthropomorphic? If there are infinite numbers of intelligences, does this necessitate an infinite universe? No big bangs, no contractions?

That I agree. What LDS teachings? Like this one? The problem, from my perspective is not about social justice (I love you toss around these politically loaded terms as if they really mean something). It's about what the gospel really teaches. I think that part of our problem is that we are unwilling to recognize that (as Elder McConkie pointed out) we don't have to accept past scripture as trumping modern revelation. We don't have to take extraordinary steps to reinterpret scripture to make it fit. We can simply recognize that sometimes scripture represents a past understanding that we now know is incorrect. And we move forward without having to try and find a way to force those scriptures into our new beliefs, and we can embrace the gospel as we understand it today (and recognize that we will yet receive more light and knowledge that helps us remove other problematic ideas from the past). The reason that I am pushing back at some of your posts is that I sense a strong undercurrent of cynicism and murmurings in a few places. Although you have many positive statements, certain points you have made appear to be influenced by radical leftist agendas. For example, your hard-headed insistence that the Proclamation on the Family has distinctions between biological sex (basically male and female) and fluid genders (radical social engineering dialectical materialism false narratives).

These things are irrelevancies to the topic. The entire thread is a discussion of God's statement in Gen 3:16 describing His expectation of how the man and the woman in marriage is to interact and to teach correct principles to their children. Of how to have a productive partnership in raising a righteous family. How to handle differences and to teach skills for helpful compromises. The real question? Of your obsessive focus on the oppression of women? What "pattern of deflection" have you so sagely detected? Not the main concern. Please review the posts on Hebrew word related to "with". LDS teachings is superior to your social justice mantra. Believe what exactly?

They can be equal in terms of partnering. But they are NOT always the "SAME" in terms of biological attributes, of physical and mental prowess, and so forth. I made a query on chatGPT: The partnership between man and woman is more powerful than the sum of the parts. Meshing/knitting together provides greater ability to develop better solutions.

How about: Puzzle over gospel challenges with yearnings in holy matrimony for the highest blessings in the Celestial Kingdom. -------------parable-----------------desire---------with------------

With Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf coming from a German heritage and Elder Ulisses Soares having been born in São Paulo, Brazil and Elder Patrick Kearon of the UK, we can anticipate more to be called from around the world. Maybe Africa? India?

Whew! You had me going. 😮‍💨 This JoD entry is very annoying to me. While I love BY, I do not appreciate this particular "wild" speculative theme that was also supported by Heber Kimball and some others. I remain fundamentally convinced of the simpler narrative of all the standard works and the events described in the Garden of Eden (keeping the overall Plan of Happiness in mind). The biggest point that I reject is for Heavenly Father to be subjected to multiple falls and repeated corruptions. Therefore, Adam cannot have been God the Father. Further, Adam did need the redemptive power of Jesus' Atonement BUT God the Father does NOT. With regards to @Nofear's topic, I consider it possible that many agenda items were discussed in the Grand Council. And for the third agenda item to be about Michael's role in being the FIRST man on earth and bringing about the implementation of the Plan of Happiness. But I really don't think there is any additional scriptural evidence or documentation for this 3rd agenda. Just the first two items.

Awesome! If you are of a mind, could you retrieve the Romney references?

Your post is disjointed. Do not understand what you are saying?

This really helps! Thank you so much. @teddyaware used ellipses to hide this qualifier: "It seems, that" in front of the quoted paragraph. Thus Elder Talmage plainly indicated this was his OWN opinion!

Thank you for your thoughtful response. However I was unable to find the words infinite and recurred in the online copy of Jesus the Christ (which is provided by Oak Norton's ScriptureNotes web app). Could you please supply the chapter and page for the above statement? Thanks (I also have the hardcopy of the book). It may be the case that Elder McKonkie was simply relying on Talmage's conjecture without having obtained his own revelation from God. I believe the scriptures do NOT support another "infinite" application of the bitter cup at the cross. This would most likely be based on Talmage's opinion. Many years ago, Mark E Petersen came to Denver (either 1981 or 1982) to preside over a stake conference. The stake president's wife picked him up at Stapleton airport and plied him with many questions about general authorities' statements. Elder Petersen would frequently reply: that is just their opinion. The "infinity" in the Garden of Gethsemane implies a complete application of the bitter cup. I believe this ruptured or traumatized all the organs in Jesus' body. Blood bled copiously thru His pores. An angel did come and minister to Him to some extent so that He could be able to get up, walk with His disciples, and be confronted by the soldiers of the Sanhedrin. I believe Jesus did carry the weight of the aftereffects of the bitter cup throughout the severe trials. Thus the greatest sufferings occurred in the garden.