And who that is capable of entertaining reverential thoughts or feelings regarding God, can suppose or believe that God the Father ever existed, even for a moment of time, without having generated this Wisdom? For in that case he must say either that God was unable to generate Wisdom before He produced her, so that He afterwards called into being her who formerly did not exist, or that He possessed the power indeed, but— what cannot be said of God without impiety— was unwilling to use it; both of which suppositions, it is patent to all, are alike absurd and impious: for they amount to this, either that God advanced from a condition of inability to one of ability, or that, although possessed of the power, He concealed it, and delayed the generation of Wisdom. (Book II, Part 1)

I am sure my understanding of God is insufficient, but wisdom -- an effective application of intelligence and intention -- is fundamental to this understanding.

This does not discount, however, the possibility of God continuing to learn. Why should God be constrained from new experiences?

Divine restraint does not strike me as a source of impiety. It is at the heart of our freedom. Why should God be forced to take action?

Perhaps it is too limited an analogy, but human wisdom is often expressed in learning and restraint.