Eternal nature versus personality changed

[halconero]

On 1/3/2017 at 10:50 AM, Gray said:

I wonder if this is still doctrinal (ie still currently taught)? I don't ever hear this taught anymore, although as you note it's in several places in the scriptures. It's a fascinating doctrine, but perhaps doesn't mesh well with the idea of celestial families? 

Maybe it's still hiding in a manual somewhere. 

I taught it this Sunday when we went over exaltation in Gospel Principles. I sourced it from both the manual and the recent essay on "Becoming like God." The lesson explains that becoming like God involves becoming the Father/Mother of spirits, and the essay says that we as intelligences have been co-existent with God forever even prior to becoming His spirit children.

[Gray]

31 minutes ago, halconero said:

I taught it this Sunday when we went over exaltation in Gospel Principles. I sourced it from both the manual and the recent essay on "Becoming like God." The lesson explains that becoming like God involves becoming the Father/Mother of spirits, and the essay says that we as intelligences have been co-existent with God forever even prior to becoming His spirit children.

Nice to know it still has some currency, at least!

[theplains]

On 10/01/2017 at 9:59 AM, RevTestament said:

Religion 430-431 is not scripture. I don't always agree with every statement made by others in the church - including church presidents.

The same manual also teaches Heavenly Father became a god too.  This teaching is found in many other
places:

April 1971, New Era, People on other Worlds
April 1971, Ensign, The King Follett Discourse
May 1976, New Era, How to Gain a Testimony
July 1979, Ensign, Line Upon Line
February 1982, Ensign, I Have a Question
January 1989, Ensign, The Restoration of Major Doctrines Through Joseph Smith
February 2002, Ensign, The Origin of Man
January 2005, Liahona, Strengthening the Family: Created in the Image of God, Male and Female
October 2008, General Conference, God Loves and Helps all His Children
2008, Teachings of Presidents of the Church - Joseph Smith, chapter 2: God the Eternal Father
February 2012, Liahona, Our Father in Heaven.
 

When will the LDS Church label this teaching as false if it's really false teaching?  If they keep waiting, many
more people will be deceived.

Jim

[Calm]

On 2017-01-03 at 10:50 AM, Gray said:

 It's a fascinating doctrine, but perhaps doesn't mesh well with the idea of celestial families? 

What is it that doesn't mesh well in your view?

[Calm]

1 hour ago, theplains said:

The same manual also teaches Heavenly Father became a god too.  This teaching is found in many other
places:

April 1971, New Era, People on other Worlds
April 1971, Ensign, The King Follett Discourse
May 1976, New Era, How to Gain a Testimony
July 1979, Ensign, Line Upon Line
February 1982, Ensign, I Have a Question
January 1989, Ensign, The Restoration of Major Doctrines Through Joseph Smith
February 2002, Ensign, The Origin of Man
January 2005, Liahona, Strengthening the Family: Created in the Image of God, Male and Female
October 2008, General Conference, God Loves and Helps all His Children
2008, Teachings of Presidents of the Church - Joseph Smith, chapter 2: God the Eternal Father
February 2012, Liahona, Our Father in Heaven.
 

When will the LDS Church label this teaching as false if it's really false teaching?  If they keep waiting, many
more people will be deceived.

Jim

Are you "TheNorthPlains"?

Do you own the LDSlearning site?

Edited January 12, 2017 by Calm

[RevTestament]

4 hours ago, theplains said:

The same manual also teaches Heavenly Father became a god too.  This teaching is found in many other
places:

April 1971, New Era, People on other Worlds
April 1971, Ensign, The King Follett Discourse
May 1976, New Era, How to Gain a Testimony
July 1979, Ensign, Line Upon Line
February 1982, Ensign, I Have a Question
January 1989, Ensign, The Restoration of Major Doctrines Through Joseph Smith
February 2002, Ensign, The Origin of Man
January 2005, Liahona, Strengthening the Family: Created in the Image of God, Male and Female
October 2008, General Conference, God Loves and Helps all His Children
2008, Teachings of Presidents of the Church - Joseph Smith, chapter 2: God the Eternal Father
February 2012, Liahona, Our Father in Heaven.
 

When will the LDS Church label this teaching as false if it's really false teaching?  If they keep waiting, many
more people will be deceived.

Jim

I imagine He took the same path as our Savior. 

John 5:19

19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. 

Do you believe Jesus deceived us? Jesus is not going to become a new god. His already is YHWH Elohim with the Father. He will be called the Eternal Father, because we choose to call Him that - not Heavenly Father. One cannot go off and become a new god. One can only become one with the Father through our Savior Jesus Christ. May I recommend reading John 17?

[Gray]

13 hours ago, Calm said:

What is it that doesn't mesh well in your view?

So in the mid 1830s we get revelations indicating that we're all coeternal with God. We had no beginning, we'll have no end, and no one created us. Earth life is a way for the MOST intelligent intelligence (God) to make the lesser intelligences (us) more like Him. 

By the 1840s we're getting revelations indicating that the nuclear family structure that exists on earth will be continued out into the eternities, including parent child relationships formed on earth. In heaven we'll continue reproducing just like we did on earth. But how do you "reproduce" in heaven when all the spirits already exist, and have existed forever? 

Edited January 12, 2017 by Gray

[Tacenda]

On 1/12/2017 at 8:08 AM, Gray said:

So in the mid 1830s we get revelations indicating that we're all coeternal with God. We had no beginning, we'll have no end, and no one created us. Earth life is a way for the MOST intelligent intelligence (God) to make the lesser intelligences (us) more like Him. 

By the 1840s we're getting revelations indicating that the nuclear family structure that exists on earth will be continued out into the eternities, including parent child relationships formed on earth. In heaven we'll continue reproducing just like we did on earth. But how do you "reproduce" in heaven when all the spirits already exist, and have existed forever? 

Bumping this up, to get an answer too!

[Calm]

Don't have an answer.  I long ago gave up believing we know what form the family will actually take or anything else eternal for that matter.

[JLHPROF]

On 1/12/2017 at 8:08 AM, Gray said:

So in the mid 1830s we get revelations indicating that we're all coeternal with God. We had no beginning, we'll have no end, and no one created us. Earth life is a way for the MOST intelligent intelligence (God) to make the lesser intelligences (us) more like Him. 

By the 1840s we're getting revelations indicating that the nuclear family structure that exists on earth will be continued out into the eternities, including parent child relationships formed on earth. In heaven we'll continue reproducing just like we did on earth. But how do you "reproduce" in heaven when all the spirits already exist, and have existed forever? 

 

11 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Bumping this up, to get an answer too!

Our intelligence has always existed.  Scripture describes intelligence as consisting of truth and light (or to use a more scientific term truth/self aware light/energy).

Whether that intelligence was organized or embodied in refined spirit matter with a bodily form we do not know for certain.
Our intelligences may be co-eternal with God but that in no way means that spirit bodies cannot be created out of spirit matter.

• Moses 3: 5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew. For I, the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth. For I, the Lord God, had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth. And I, the Lord God, had created all the children of men; and not yet a man to till the ground; for in heaven created I them; and there was not yet flesh upon the earth, neither in the water, neither in the air.

Clearly we were created spiritually at some point but our intelligences are not created.  This shows a clear differentiation.
Whether this spiritual creation was achieved in the same method as our physical bodies depends on whether you believe Brigham Young's beliefs or not.

[Gray]

On 1/16/2017 at 8:55 PM, JLHPROF said:

 

Our intelligence has always existed.  Scripture describes intelligence as consisting of truth and light (or to use a more scientific term truth/self aware light/energy).

Whether that intelligence was organized or embodied in refined spirit matter with a bodily form we do not know for certain.
Our intelligences may be co-eternal with God but that in no way means that spirit bodies cannot be created out of spirit matter.

• Moses 3: 5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew. For I, the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth. For I, the Lord God, had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth. And I, the Lord God, had created all the children of men; and not yet a man to till the ground; for in heaven created I them; and there was not yet flesh upon the earth, neither in the water, neither in the air.

Clearly we were created spiritually at some point but our intelligences are not created.  This shows a clear differentiation.
Whether this spiritual creation was achieved in the same method as our physical bodies depends on whether you believe Brigham Young's beliefs or not.

I think that just shows more inconsistencies in the ideas about our origins. Abraham 3 seems to say that intelligences are identical to "souls" or "spirits"

 

Quote

Abr 3

 

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.

 

Also:

 

Quote

D&C 93

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

 

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, Gray said:

I think that just shows more inconsistencies in the ideas about our origins. Abraham 3 seems to say that intelligences are identical to "souls" or "spirits"

Abr 3:22 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.

D&C 93:29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.

 

I don't agree that there is an inconsistency there.

D&C 93 shows that intelligence is coeternal and has always existed.
Abraham 3:22-23 shows that some intelligences were spirits (but not necessarily all) and that this was after they were organized, which based on the scripture I quoted from Moses 3:5 could definitely refer to their spirit creation.

I still view "co-eternal uncreated intelligences" as those self aware beings with no spirit bodies, and spirits as those who hade received a spirit birth (whatever form you believe that takes).
And the fact that some spirits are referred to as intelligences is not incorrect or inconsistent as they would be both.

[Gray]

20 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I don't agree that there is an inconsistency there.

D&C 93 shows that intelligence is coeternal and has always existed.
Abraham 3:22-23 shows that some intelligences were spirits (but not necessarily all) and that this was after they were organized, which based on the scripture I quoted from Moses 3:5 could definitely refer to their spirit creation.

I still view "co-eternal uncreated intelligences" as those self aware beings with no spirit bodies, and spirits as those who hade received a spirit birth (whatever form you believe that takes).
And the fact that some spirits are referred to as intelligences is not incorrect or inconsistent as they would be both.

What do you think "organized" means, out of curiosity? It's never defined. It does seem to say that some intelligences were always spirits, and perhaps others were not, but it's not terribly clear on that point. Was it only the noble and great ones who were always spirits? Or did they evolve into spirits before God organized them? The idea of an intelligence nested inside a spirit body is possible, but I don't think it we have enough information to conclude that this is what Joseph was thinking. And none of this sounds anything like procreation. Let's say that Abraham is one of the noble and great ones. Does that mean he was always a spirit, from eternity past? In what sense could you say then that he was the spiritual offspring of God in anything but a metaphorical sense?

 

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, Gray said:

What do you think "organized" means, out of curiosity? It's never defined. It does seem to say that some intelligences were always spirits, and perhaps others were not, but it's not terribly clear on that point. Was it only the noble and great ones who were always spirits? Or did they evolve into spirits before God organized them? The idea of an intelligence nested inside a spirit body is possible, but I don't think it we have enough information to conclude that this is what Joseph was thinking. And none of this sounds anything like procreation. Let's say that Abraham is one of the noble and great ones. Does that mean he was always a spirit, from eternity past? In what sense could you say then that he was the spiritual offspring of God in anything but a metaphorical sense?

 

I find the idea of an intelligence nested inside a spirit body very consistent with scripture.  Do we know for sure?  No, of course not.
But given the scriptural existence of a spiritual creation and the fact that intelligences were not created, somehow we had to go from intelligence to spirit.

Moses 3 clearly says " I, the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth"
D&C 93 clearly says " Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made"

So conflating "intelligences" and "spirits" would seem to contradict scripture.  One is created, the other is not.
As for HOW intelligences become spirits, it is pure speculation.  I personally believe Brigham's (and other's) explanation:

• "[God] created man, as we create our children; for there is no other process of creation in heaven, on the earth, in the earth, or under the earth, or in all the eternities, that is, that were, or that ever will be."

• "Intelligence or spirit element became intelligences after the spirits were born as individual [spirit] entities." - Bruce R. McConkie

I know there is a popular belief among many members right now that the creation of spirit bodies either never happened or was accomplished in some other method than sex.
I have seen no doctrinal or scriptural evidence to support these beliefs beyond people's distaste for the idea of eternal increase referring to childbirth.

And as for "organized" I go with what John Taylor (and others) taught concerning premortal family and priesthood organization:

• Knowest thou not that eternities ago thy spirit, pure and holy, dwelt in thy Heavenly Father’s bosom, and in His presence, and with thy mother, one of the queens of heaven, surrounded by thy brother and sister spirits in the spirit world, among the Gods?  That as thy spirit beheld the scenes transpiring there, and thou grewest in intelligence, thou sawest worlds upon worlds organized and peopled with thy kindred spirits who took upon them tabernacles, died, were resurrected, and received their exaltation on the redeemed worlds they once dwelt upon.  Thou being willing and anxious to imitate them, waiting and desirous to obtain a body, a resurrection and exaltation also, and having obtained permission, madest a covenant with one of thy kindred spirits to be thy guardian angel while in mortality, also with two others, male and female spirits, that thou wouldst come and take a tabernacle through their lineage, and become one of their offspring.  You also chose a kindred spirit whom you loved in the spirit world to be your head, stay, husband and protector on the earth and to exalt you in eternal worlds.  All these were arranged, likewise the spirits that should tabernacle through your lineage.

I kind of think this is what "organized" refers to.
 

[halconero]

On 2017-01-19 at 11:09 AM, JLHPROF said:

I find the idea of an intelligence nested inside a spirit body very consistent with scripture.  Do we know for sure?  No, of course not.
But given the scriptural existence of a spiritual creation and the fact that intelligences were not created, somehow we had to go from intelligence to spirit.

Moses 3 clearly says " I, the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth"
D&C 93 clearly says " Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made"

So conflating "intelligences" and "spirits" would seem to contradict scripture.  One is created, the other is not.
As for HOW intelligences become spirits, it is pure speculation.  I personally believe Brigham's (and other's) explanation:

 

• "[God] created man, as we create our children; for there is no other process of creation in heaven, on the earth, in the earth, or under the earth, or in all the eternities, that is, that were, or that ever will be."

   

• "Intelligence or spirit element became intelligences after the spirits were born as individual [spirit] entities." - Bruce R. McConkie

   

I know there is a popular belief among many members right now that the creation of spirit bodies either never happened or was accomplished in some other method than sex.
I have seen no doctrinal or scriptural evidence to support these beliefs beyond people's distaste for the idea of eternal increase referring to childbirth.

And as for "organized" I go with what John Taylor (and others) taught concerning premortal family and priesthood organization:

 

• Knowest thou not that eternities ago thy spirit, pure and holy, dwelt in thy Heavenly Father’s bosom, and in His presence, and with thy mother, one of the queens of heaven, surrounded by thy brother and sister spirits in the spirit world, among the Gods?  That as thy spirit beheld the scenes transpiring there, and thou grewest in intelligence, thou sawest worlds upon worlds organized and peopled with thy kindred spirits who took upon them tabernacles, died, were resurrected, and received their exaltation on the redeemed worlds they once dwelt upon.  Thou being willing and anxious to imitate them, waiting and desirous to obtain a body, a resurrection and exaltation also, and having obtained permission, madest a covenant with one of thy kindred spirits to be thy guardian angel while in mortality, also with two others, male and female spirits, that thou wouldst come and take a tabernacle through their lineage, and become one of their offspring.  You also chose a kindred spirit whom you loved in the spirit world to be your head, stay, husband and protector on the earth and to exalt you in eternal worlds.  All these were arranged, likewise the spirits that should tabernacle through your lineage.

   

I kind of think this is what "organized" refers to.
 

I don't get the distaste for spirit childbirth. The distaste is distasteful in and of itself as it seems to imply that regular childbirth is somehow ungodly, when there are multiple Latter-day Saint quotes on the divine nature of bearing and rearing children. That and I feel as though most who dislike it reimagine the process as some sort of magical thing à la Harry Potter.

[Calm]

I think the biggest problem is wondering how it could happen with billions of children.

[JLHPROF]

3 hours ago, halconero said:

I don't get the distaste for spirit childbirth. The distaste is distasteful in and of itself as it seems to imply that regular childbirth is somehow ungodly, when there are multiple Latter-day Saint quotes on the divine nature of bearing and rearing children. That and I feel as though most who dislike it reimagine the process as some sort of magical thing à la Harry Potter.

I think that might have something to do with the curse placed upon Eve.  We are raised and taught, even in the Church, that while having children is a blessing the bringing forth of a child is great sacrifice, struggle, and pain.  We believe that the pain part is from mortality, but I think we still see the very concept as a bit of a chore.
And nobody wants to think about doing chores for eternity, even if they no longer hurt.
But what do I know...just a man's perspective on the subject.  I just happen to believe eternal increase means exactly that.

1 hour ago, Calm said:

I think the biggest problem is wondering how it could happen with billions of children.

Agreed.  But remember we are also talking eternities.  Even the best estimate (Joseph Smith) of the length of a creation is 2 1/2 billion earth years.
And there is no reason to believe that spirit children were all born for any given creation within that time frame.  Nor even to assume that we all have the same Heavenly Mother.
Given the great expanse of eternity and the immortal nature of God, I also doubt the birthing factory image.
Our premortal existence could stretch backwards for eons.  We have no idea just how long ago our spirit births could be.
 

[Nofear]

Even given eternities, viviparous birth of spirit children seems numerically challenging. Presumably the resurrected bodies of women have a uterus and why would that be? But, are we also resurrected with a coccyx or the ability to wiggle our ears (https://www.britannica.com/list/7-vestigial-features-of-the-human-body)? The point of the later question is to exemplify that we don't necessarily know as much about the precise nature of the resurrection as we initially presume.

As a side note, before coming to this world our spirit bodies were mature adults. I quite suspect our spirit bodies had a similar maturation to our physical bodies. But I'm not aware of any comments to that effect authoritative or otherwise (such as "near birth experiences", though I haven't read many of those). If you are aware of any comment in LDS discussion that references a pre-adult spirit child, I would be quite interested in it.

[Calm]

Women are born with a limited number of eggs.  So the process can't be identical just for that reason (I can think of a few more, but it makes my point).

[Nofear]

Thank you Calmoriah. Another item on the list. ☺

[BlueDreams]

On 1/20/2017 at 7:03 PM, halconero said:

I don't get the distaste for spirit childbirth. The distaste is distasteful in and of itself as it seems to imply that regular childbirth is somehow ungodly, when there are multiple Latter-day Saint quotes on the divine nature of bearing and rearing children. That and I feel as though most who dislike it reimagine the process as some sort of magical thing à la Harry Potter.

I'm a super body/sex positive person. Hope to have natural births when/if ever I get pregnant. Etc. So I wouldn't say it's distaste that make me hesitant about spirit child birth. 

1. Have you had people talk about/experience pregnancy and childbirth on earth. Even for those who loved pregnancy it's not exactly a walk in the park.

2. As pointed out, people make parallel to that and what Christ did.....including scriptures. Such as in Moses 6:59 where it talks of how spiritual rebirth, as made possible through Christ's sacrifice, is in continuation of being brought to earth, through the inferred work of the mother. It's a singular event without an eternal equivalent that entails enduring much potential pain and sacrifice for the continuation of mankind. It is a beautiful incomprehensible gift. But it's a insular gift. The act isn't assumed to be repeated again and again. Just because something has spiritual weight and greatness tied to it, does not mean it needs to continue in literal completion for all of eternity.

3. It assumes a direct continuation that doesn't stay for just about any other human act. For example, building a home. We talk of having a home in heaven or having "many mansions" above. But what heaven is actually like entails a home that is quite different from our own. The earth was meant to "house" us. I do not see most anyone imagining how we create a house as somehow an eternal construct.

4. If we continue with the idea, do we also have eternal nursing of spirit babies. I mean, that's what women 's physical breasts are made for: nourishing children. No one seems to picture that either because there is an inherent difference between an embodied intelligence in its first estate and an embodied spirit in its second. 

5. The ideas surrounding the concept are also a little holey. Take JLHPROF's favorite quote:

Quote

Knowest thou not that eternities ago thy spirit, pure and holy, dwelt in thy Heavenly Father’s bosom, and in His presence, and with thy mother, one of the queens of heaven, surrounded by thy brother and sister spirits in the spirit world, among the Gods?  That as thy spirit beheld the scenes transpiring there, and thou grewest in intelligence, thou sawest worlds upon worlds organized and peopled with thy kindred spirits who took upon them tabernacles, died, were resurrected, and received their exaltation on the redeemed worlds they once dwelt upon.  Thou being willing and anxious to imitate them, waiting and desirous to obtain a body, a resurrection and exaltation also, and having obtained permission, madest a covenant with one of thy kindred spirits to be thy guardian angel while in mortality, also with two others, male and female spirits, that thou wouldst come and take a tabernacle through their lineage, and become one of their offspring.  You also chose a kindred spirit whom you loved in the spirit world to be your head, stay, husband and protector on the earth and to exalt you in eternal worlds.  All these were arranged, likewise the spirits that should tabernacle through your lineage.

Some of the concepts are already ones that are considered more religious theory than anything else. And they have this crazy tendency to fall apart around people like me right around this bolded part. I madest a covenant with two other male and female spirits that I'd come through their mistake/sin and take a tabernacle through their one-time lineage, and become one of their offspring. Along with me are several other children with around 8 females and males in short-term "covenants" agreeing to bring forth their tabernacles, half, again, not in marriage and as a one-time lineage that ends sometime after to make way for a few other spirits who made covenants as well, but were fickle and chose another male or female spirit. But it was all meant to be, our groupon of family covenants. Because covenants.

 That also assumes some form of soul mates. That, again, is poked apart quite a bit by LDS leaders over the years.

It takes on a perspective that fits exactly 2 feasible family constructs: monogamous or polygamous sans polyandry. Every other family construct falls through on the pre-assigned covenanted relationships. And it leads to explanations for these families that aren't just a little painful but a untrue. Personally, I received a strong confirmation that this was the family God wanted me to be in, mess and all....even if the way I got into it wasn't the way He'd prefer. How that works, I don't know.

So if everything in this quote is basically questionable, why is it that spirit childbirth coming through the exalted womb and nourished at the exalted teat isn't? 

 

So basically, I've got several problems with it. There's more I could say, but I have to go meet my half-brother from another mother as opposed to one of the others from another father at the temple. My siblings were very fickle about who they wanted to covenant with to bring about their tabernacles.

 

With luv,

BD

[clarkgoble]

On 1/16/2017 at 8:12 AM, Tacenda said:

Bumping this up, to get an answer too!

While spirit birth as the creating a spirit body for an intelligence in some fashion analogous to sexual birth of mammals is a common belief and widely taught in the early Utah period it actually has less ground than people assume. Like many, I tend to favor it but exactly how analogous the process would be seems impossible to know. 

During Nauvoo intelligence was often used as synonymous with spirit. While there are slight variations and differences in connotation they aren't enough to establish a doctrine from. Parley P. Pratt prior to the revelation that spirit was matter held to an emanation model of creation where spirits were literally made from the immaterial body of God. (This was likely derived from various quasi-neoplatonic beliefs of the time found in both the mainstream like Emerson as well as in esoteric traditions) With the transition to materialism the idea of spirits still coming from God's body may well have persisted but changed in conception as Joseph emphasized how much like a human being even God the father was. However some people, noting the lack of clear distinction between intelligence and spirit in Nauvoo instead think an adoption model is more likely and reject the idea of spirit birth.

By the early 20th century as Mormon thinkers became more sophisticated in both scientific and philosophical background attempts at systemization led to various new theories. A common one was the adoption of the Cartesian view of mind still popular in the early days of the 20th century. Intelligence thus became a Cartesian or perhaps even Thomist-like mind/soul. Spirit birth was putting this pre-existent mind into a spirit body with the process done quasi-natural in some sense. (The details always fall apart there)  Others adopt Orson Pratt's views from the 19th century which involve property dualism (mind/matter together in a single substance) with atoms. So spirit birth is, as for Pratt, just organizing an 'atom' of mind into having a body by combining it with other 'atoms' in some unified way. (Later 20th century thinkers brought in the idea of emergent phenomena to explain this) The final view surprising comes from Brigham Young and is really very similar to physicalism that dominated most of 20th century thought. There "intelligence" isn't consciousness or anything like that but just parts that when organized make an intelligent spirit. Split up the parts and the soul is lost. So what is eternal are these parts but not really any sense of identity. While there are a few adherents to Brigham's view it's nearly universally fallen out of favor. Most, following Bruce R. McConkie just say we don't know and leave it all pretty vague.