• How is a God like a tree?  Both have innumerable “seeds”.
• Of the millions of seeds, how many must fully mature for the tree’s purpose to be fulfilled.
• Is starvation and all the potential tragedies that can befall us  worse than never being born?
• How can Latter-Day Saints claim there is but one God, and yet believe we have the potential to become gods?
  I once had a mission companion who encouraged me to look for truth in everything.  He’d say, “You see that oil spot on the road, there is probably deep meaning you can find in that.”  I’m still looking for that one, but I did gain some useful perspectives by applying his method to observations of a pine tree.   

  The many seeds of a tree
  I noticed that a single pine cone has perhaps over a hundred seeds, and a single tree may have hundreds of cones in a season, and that tree again may see hundreds of seasons.  100×100x100 is potentially a million seeds in the life of a tree.  What is the purpose of these seeds?  When so many are lost, is it still worth it?

   How God is like a tree
  God commands all living things to “multiply and replenish the earth”, and informs us that all living things can have joy in their posterity.  A pine with a million seeds would undoubtedly love to become the parent of a giant forest, seeing all of its seeds survive to maturity.  But there is likely much opposition to the seeds that will result in many never germinating, and others living a short time but crowded out by stronger ones.  Still, the tree’s ultimate purpose is to replace itself, and it is successful and can find joy if only one of the millions rises to its parent’s stature.  Likewise the tree can find joy in simply the lives of those that sprang forth even if they never reach their full potential.  “Better to have been born than not born at all”.

  Hence, I know God can be satisfied with His Creation if even only one person makes it all the way.  Fortunately many more, perhaps even billions (see previous parts of this essay), will indeed make it all the way, resulting in a great forest of magnificent children, which will undoubtedly bring joy and honor unto their Father.While it is sad that billions never germinated (1/3^rd that followed Satan), and likewise sad that billions more will not grow to full spiritual maturity, God still finds great joy in even the mild successes of his children.  Simply choosing His plan and being rewarded with earth life provides a measure of joy to our Father even if we never progress beyond that. 

  Hence He can be sad for us and glad for us at the same time, much the same as we can be sad when we see our children choosing paths that lead away from God and towards pain, but glad in spite of the pain and loss that they at least got life, experience, and a promise of a decent after life (we know the 3^rd Kingdom, while referred to as “hell” in some senses, is actually not that bad of a place.  It is simply far inferior to the better places).  Imagine the sense of joy in seeing one of His children embrace the truth and grow to full maturity!  This is God’s purpose, and His purpose is fulfilled if only one among the billions walks the entire path.  With millions of seeds, a tree need only replace itself to continue the forest.  God likewise need only have one child progress to Godhood to make the entire creation worth it. 

  I told this to a friend once, and he thought the tragedy of the losses outweighed the success of the few.  He thought that for God to see anyone not attain the Highest Kingdom must be devastating to God (as he knew it would be for him if his kids didn’t make it).  If my kids choose foolishly, I too will feel tremendous loss for them, but I know I won’t be so pained as to wish they’d never been born (unless they do something that earns that label – which things are enumerated in the scriptures and are not many).  I will take a measure of joy and pride in the goodness of their lives even if there’s a lot of bad to go with it.  I’ll be glad they got to live and choose. 

  Which is worse, starvation or never being born?
  Many argue that perhaps it is better to limit family sizes in places that seem predestined to experience intense human suffering (Africa comes to mind) to avoid exposing so many people to the suffering.  How do you eliminate human suffering?  Two ways: eliminate suffering, or eliminate humans.  Eliminating humans is easier than eliminating the wide array of things that can cause intense suffering.  How do you eliminate humans?  After birth (genocide and murder); after conception (abortion); or through simply not having them at all.

  With this life being a simple spec in the grand vision of eternity backward and forward, I am convinced that, if hoisted upon us, to suffer intensely for the short span of our lives will pay great dividends in the next realm.   Personally, I am happy I exist.  If I were called on to suffer as Job, or even as many in Africa or elsewhere (and the list of what has happened to our brothers and sisters is very long and painful – and lucky for us we do not know all the evil that others have perpetrated), I still like to think I’d at least be glad I had been born.  Or if the “glad I was born” is too hard to comprehend due to the magnitude of the suffering and the lack of offsetting joyful experiences, I would at least hope for a better, infinite world which if gained would indeed make the fact of birth worth the intense pain of a short 80 year life.  Or if I lost hope in that world so that all was truly lost, I’d be glad to find afterwards that it was a fact in spite of my lost hope, and I again would benefit from my birth.  So to be born is always better than not (unless you commit something for which no birth was a better option).

  How big should our families then be? 
  Since birth is wonderful for the one who now exists, and the world can handle it in spite of the creative lies to the contrary, we should participate in that wonder as many times as we get the chance, and to the extent that we are righteous enough and strong enough to allow it.  If we do not prevent it, but God sends no children (infertility or lack of marriage opportunity), then this is an opportunity to get involved in raising other people’s kids.  (Adoption, foster care, role modeling, service).   If you do have kids, it often takes tremendous faith to believe you can refrain from going berserk or broke if you have more (Alicia and I are berserk on even days, broke on odd days).  I do believe that God knows us very well and if we listen to the Spirit we can tell when He is satisfied.  I also believe that if we have faith we can survive any number of children.

  Many think it is strange or blasphemous to say we can become gods, yet all living things testify that this is so!
  One of the hardest things for people to accept about Latter-Day Saint doctrine is the notion that we can become “like God” – literally.  While true, I think Christ intentionally discourages His spokesmen from using that as the opening conversation starter because it violates the “milk before meat” principle.  I too am reluctant to speak on what I’ve learned of the subject before a potentially worldwide audience.  However, I suppose the majority of those reading this are likely to be LDS.  If you’re not, perhaps I can provide some rationale that can help you accept this as a very logical conclusion.

  First, we call God “Our Father”, and we are “His Children”.  Where in all the world can you find offspring without the potential to grow up to be like its parent?  As God’s children, created in His image, He is trying to tell us that we can be like Him.  We can become gods.

  If “children” grow up to be “parents”, then there must be many gods.  Why then do we say there is but one God?
  Think of it this way.  I have one father, Ross Brown.  My brothers and sister rightly say that we have but one father, and we owe our entire existence to him and my mother (Kaye) as our creators.  Still, we do not deny that there are other parents with other families.  There is but one God for us on this earth.  This does not in itself negate the possibility that there are other gods for other earths. 

  If there are many gods, wouldn’t their space conflict with our Father’s space? 
  One might think that “an infinite God with infinite creations” would not leave any room for anyone else.  This is all very difficult for our finite, mortal minds to comprehend, but simple mathematical observations can be enlightening.  How many times can I divide up a pencil?  Infinite.  How many pencils can there be?  Potentially infinite.  If there were infinite pencils, would that consume all the space that there could be no room for infinite oranges?  No, because infinite pencils might simply consume one point on the sphere of potential directions of infinite length.  How many points are there on the surface of the sphere with lines emanating from the center out into infinity?  - Again, infinite.  There is an infinite number of infinities.  There is likewise potentially an infinite number of gods with infinite works and infinitely large domains. 

  Where does one infinity stop and the next begin? 
  Is there a flashing light somewhere out in space that demarks the end of our God’s universe and if you go two more feet that direction you’re into some other God’s universe?  I’m sure it’s not like that, but I’m also sure that the answer is beyond our capacity to comprehend.  It’s similar to how we comprehend the concept of infinity, and at the same time we don’t comprehend it.

  “String Theory”, aka the “Theory of Everything” may be part of the answer.
  I saw a fascinating program on String Theory lately.  It is pretty complex math, and exists only as math.  It says something like matter is really made up of energy particles billions of times smaller than the atoms they make up, and possibly billions of them in an atom.   Einstein once remarked, “We have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.”  It seems to jibe with his E=mc^2 thing, which we all know makes a pretty big bang.   The energy is “strings” because I guess they are circular and vibrate like strings.  The style of their vibration is what defines the style of matter or energy that they are.  There also seems to be lively discussion in the scientific community about “conscious energy”, or “living matter”.  

  It is so inconceivable that it can’t be tested for by any normal means, so some don’t consider it true science and instead more like religion – especially because it seems to suggest things like “infinite parallel universes”, “unlimited dimensions”, “living matter”, etc.  I’m sure I am slaughtering the theory – I’ve hardly tried to study it yet.  But finally I am seeing a reconciliation of how God and His wonders can be perfectly scientific and explainable.  One of the miracles of our Lord that our “learned men” scoff at is the claim that Jesus turned water into wine.  It seems too magical, mystical, anything but mechanical which they tend to believe all things boil down to.  But math has held up in the past.  It was hard to believe Einstein’s magic equation until it blew up two Japanese cities! 

  Suppose the wild ideas evoked by this math hold water (or wine).  Accept for a moment that matter is made of small vibrating energy strings, and even that those energy strings have some form of consciousness (life if you will).   Christ, having mastered the priesthood and earned respect of all conscious things (or small “I ams”), could easily say to water “turn to wine”, and the strings would simply respond to a respected Organizer (since we know matter is organized and not created), under the authority of the Great I AM and vibrate as wine.   99.99% of highly educated, rigorously scientific minds by this world’s standards cannot accept God in part because they cannot conceive of the mechanism that causes dead, mechanical elements suddenly “jump to attention” when the right voice commands.  It does in fact seem you must move into the make-believe realm of Yoda mentally moving rocks by some strange “force” that makes for a good movie, but shouldn’t get much serious thought. 

  The crazy thing is that the truth may be very close to “The Force”.  In fact, that may literally be the very mechanism of the Theory of Everything, and God knows the science behind controlling the mechanism.  God has said that all matter is “intelligence”.  This works perfectly with the concept of “conscious energy”.  I think, therefore I am, a highest order intelligence.  God is the Great I AM, or the highest developed of the highest order intelligences.  All conscious energy is an “I am”, and knows and respects the Great I AM.  So when God speaks personally or through an authorized servant, what we normally think of as inanimate matter suddenly responds, and strings vibrate such that one can walk on water, or brain tumors suddenly vibrate away, or site suddenly vibrates back to the blind!

  There are good reasons to stay away from conversations like this with most people.  It goes in circles, gets deeper and deeper, and leaves many thoroughly confused and convinced either you’re loony, or if this is what LDS believe, then the LDS are whacked out.  Even if the truth is not so far from this (and it may be), it is of limited value against the fundamental need to stay true to the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel.  For me, I have a strong testimony of God and His True Gospel and have found it very rewarding to exercise logic skills and spiritual vision or discernment to connect what I know of science with what I know of God, and discover they can easily be in perfect harmony.  God’s science is SO beyond us, but such wonderful mathematics and miniscule discoveries as God has allowed mankind to make seem to provide glimmers of vision into what may be Real, True, and Beautiful. 

  I have found that while we cannot know with certainty the answers to many things, at least finding reasonable responses to challenging or “impossible to know” questions fortifies my faith – questions not always from others but more often from within the recesses of my own mind.  When a seemingly “fatal flaw” arises in the doctrine, I have always found a rational explanation, or at least a strong potential for a rational explanation.  

   

This entry was posted on Sunday, June 18th, 2006 at and is filed under "Population" is NOT negative, Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.