But I’m also very wary of inflating humanity too much, or trying to familiarize God too much.

Your read on section 121 is interesting.

Very quickly. There is a general sense in which I agree with you. However there is a characteristic and very Mormon sense in which I disagree and it is related to the doctrine of exaltation, the necessity of marriage, the purpose of temple sealings, and King Follett Discourse style theology.

Roughly speaking we teach that we are saved and exalted through the saving and exalting of our lineal and adopted children. That implies that our Heavenly Father is saved and exalted through the
the saving and exalting of his children, i.e. us.

The logical implication is that his kingdom and glory would be minimized if he did not have any children to save and exalt, or if every last one of them rebelled and became everlasting servants of the devil.

I referred you to D&C 121:46, which teaches much about this principle, and the proper mode of divine (priesthood) authority:

Let thy bowels also be full of charity towards all men, and to the household of faith, and let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly; then shall thy confidence wax strong in the presence of God; and the doctrine of the priesthood shall distil upon thy soul as the dews from heaven.

The Holy Ghost shall be thy constant companion, and thy scepter an unchanging scepter of righteousness and truth; and thy dominion shall be an everlasting dominion, and without compulsory means it shall flow unto thee forever and ever.
(D&C 121:45-46)

I don’t have the philosophical or religious studies training to really engage your response to my post on your terms. I’ve seen how debates with you tend to run on numerous occasions, and I’m not going there.

I am in no way criticizing your style of argument, but I am simply unable to debate with you on questions of metaphysics or Armenianism, or whatever else. I have my own style, and it doesn’t often work well with yours.

But I am pretty familiar with the scriptures, and, depending on what your response meant, I think it’s more or less speculative.

If you meant that God requires humanity, as an abstract concept, I’ll concede you probably have a good argument.

But if you are asserting that God needs you, or God needs me, or God needs America, or God needed Nebucanezzer, or God needs humanity on any level other than the abstract …

No, I don’t think that is correct.

Back to the main topic, my position is that the combination of the Lord’s power, persuasive ability, character knowledge, and calculated anticipation is more than adequate to need to write only one detailed plan for our temporal salvation, represented by the book with the seven seals, i.e. that is capacity is sufficient to the degree that writing a detailed backup plan for any number of serious contingencies would be contrary to his own economy.

Of course when he talks to us, he must use on the one hand or one the other language, because his anticipation of our obedience or disobedience to that very principle according to our own character and his spiritual guidance and direction is what keeps his plan on track, such that his purposes shall not fail, and all his words are fulfilled in the process of time.

The other limiting case is comprehensive understanding of what God understands about the matter. There is a spectrum in between, and that spectrum is traversed only through thought and pondering unto understanding. Not logical discovery, in general, but logical understanding and ability to apply revealed principles to unprecedented cases.

The domain of the real, as Charles Peirce would put it. Not the mere trivia of actuality, but eternal principles and patterns, both the principles and patterns of natural law, but more so the principles and patterns of divine law and ordinance, in greatest detail the working whereby the Lord accomplishes his purposes.

As to gaining and understanding of those words, there is no revelation without intelligence. Warm fuzzy feelings do no one any good, unless they are warm fuzzy feelings about *something* – some principle or rule, that when repeated or adhered to, will cause those confirmatory feelings to return.

etc….

I still think you are preaching to the choir more than perhaps you think you are. I don’t know that I said anything that contradicted any of this. Maybe it’s just my lousy choice of words that mean something different to you. I dunno. But I really am not sure what you are trying to convince me of.

I appreciate your perspective. It is a common one – in twentieth century Mormonism, in particular. However Joseph Smith and many other scriptures affirm what I am advocating here.

Joseph Smith said that a man is saved no faster than he gains knowledge. The knowledge of the world? No. The knowledge of God. And knowledge does not come like a magical brain download – it only comes through righteousness, obedience, and extensive pondering. That is why we have to study things out in our minds in order to receive answers to our prayers. We must be prepared to understand the answer. It is very hard to be steadfast on a course of action that one does not understand even the first principles of.

… the things of God are of deep import; and time, and experience, and careful and ponderous and solemn thoughts can only find them out. Thy mind, O man! if thou wilt lead a soul unto salvation, must stretch as high as the utmost heavens, and search into and contemplate the darkest abyss, and the broad expanse of eternity–thou must commune with God. How much more dignified and noble are the thoughts of God, than the vain imaginations of the human heart! None but fools will trifle with the souls of men.
(TPJS, 137)

Now, please understand that “logic” is just a general term for any formal means of organizing, understanding, and discovering the truth. All logic is not created equal, but there is no language without logic. Language is logic. All language is a way of representing or communicating distinctions between what is, was, or will be the case and what is not.

The Lord said that truth is the knowledge of things as they are, as they were, and as they are to come. Truth is meaningless unless that also entails the knowledge of what is not the case, was not the case, and never will be the case. That is what language is for – to make that distinction – to say the truth, and dispute error.

Reason is no more and no less than comprehending the proper semantics of language, particularly gospel language, according to the inspiration of the Lord. There are rules that he can teach us about how to interpret his word. Those rules have a correspondence with eternal analytical truths of language and logic, the very first one is the law of non-contradiction.

Other commonly accepted principles of secular logic are not so favored, but with a proper understanding of divine language and symbolism, and yes, even analytics of the sword of truth – we may gradually attain, line upon line, precept upon precept, unto a knowledge of the mind of Christ, yea even the means by which he thinks.

If that were not the case in any degree, the scriptures would be void of theological reasoning. On the contrary, the scriptures are full of it – Paul is a particular example – hard to understand at times, but full of hidden mysteries in almost every word.

As to gaining and understanding of those words, there is no revelation without intelligence. Warm fuzzy feelings do no one any good, unless they are warm fuzzy feelings about *something* – some principle or rule, that when repeated or adhered to, will cause those confirmatory feelings to return. And that is just the very beginning of inspiration. Listen to the words of Isaiah:

Woe unto them that rise up early in the morning, that they may follow strong drink; that continue until night, till wine inflame them!

And the harp, and the viol, the tabret, and pipe, and wine, are in their feasts: but they regard not the work of the LORD, neither consider the operation of his hands.

Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge: and their honourable men are famished, and their multitude dried up with thirst.

Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it.
(Isaiah 5:11-14)

i.e. iniquity and captivity to the ways of the world is a consequence of ignorance of heavenly things.

The communications I made to this council were of things spiritual, and to be received only by the spiritual minded: and there was nothing made known to these men but what will be made known to all the Saints of the last days
(TPJS 237)

And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.

And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.

And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.

This prophecy has not been fulfilled yet, but no doubt will be fulfilled soon enough. God intends to save, and hopefull exalt us some day, and he cannot possibly do that unless we strive to learn how to reason like he reasons, and think like he thinks. “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect” – the doctrine of mystery avoidance is the way of slackers and cowards.

Seek not for riches but for wisdom; and, behold, the mysteries of God shall be unfolded unto you, and then shall you be made rich. Behold, he that hath eternal life is rich.
(D&C 11:7)

I’m sorry if I give the impression that I think people are inherently incapable of understanding God’s mysteries. I just think that that process is a lot more personal, a lot more internal, a lot more spiritual and a lot less about logic per se. In my mind, the combination of Jacob 4:8 “Behold, great and marvelous are the works of the Lord. How unsearchable are the depths of the mysteries of him; and it is impossible that man should find out all his ways. And no man knoweth of his ways save it be revealed unto him; wherefore, brethren, despise not the revelations of God” and Alma 12:9 — “It is given unto many to know the mysteries of God; nevertheless they are laid under a strict command that they shall not impart conly according to the portion of his word which he doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which they give unto him” suggest to me that knowing God’s mysteries and attempting to explain them are very likely incompatible. I believe strongly in the fact that we will have the opportunity to understand all things. But I don’t believe this is a telestial-sphere process, nor something that can easily be described in telestial-sphere words. Not that we aren’t to seek to understand and even to discuss towards understanding, but, ultimately, only the Spirit (opened up to us because of the Atonement) as well as perhaps even more to come when Christ reigns on the earth (and beyond) can make it possible for us to see and understand more.

So, in a sense, perhaps you are preaching to the choir about the possibility of understanding mysteries. I firmly believe in this possibility. I still don’t think logic is the key, at least not in the way we define logic. I find the more I understand of God, His prophets, His truths, the more they “make sense” to me (as you mentioned)– but not in a way that I can just “explain” to someone. This kind of logic is not simply transferable, it must be felt, transferred by the Spirit. That’s why I think there is a point where “logical” discussion about these things fails because each of us is at a different place in terms of the Spirit. If you have learned things from the Spirit, for example, that I am not yet ready to receive, then you could write until Carpal Tunnel took over your life (my equivalent here of speaking until you are blue in the face) and still not “convince” me of anything. (If, indeed, the Spirit has revealed great, mysterious things to you, I would wonder if you should be saying much at all in fact!) :) Am I making any sense? Maybe my stumblingblock in these discussions is when supposed mysteries of God are conflated with philosophies and language of the world that are laden with telestialness. I find a disconnect there that not only reflects my limited vocabulary, but also that doesn’t settle with the way I think the Spirit works. Or, perhaps I should clarify that that is not the way He works with ME.

BTW, I had to chuckle at your 2+2=5 thing. I was seriously scratching my head on that one. :)