I agree with this.
I disagree with this. I believe our children are already beginning to see things differently than I did at their age, because stuff is out there to be learned about non-literal belief...and even at BYU they are teaching different views. The ship turns slowly. But the children are able to get different views than just orthodoxy, although that is still dominant and valued. I'm able to have hypothetical discussions with my married children. However, I try not to go too far. I let them lead the questions and thoughts and hypotheticals. But I see it in them.Even if every adult member were a nonliteral believer, the next generation would be predominantly literal because of our discourse. Children aren't going to read between the lines.
I work for a catholic organization, and they do have straight out and open talks about how the bible is riddled with historical inaccuracies, if that is how catholics want to view the bible...they tell me they will have a struggle when the bible was never written with that intention of such detail. Even still, the catholic leaders I talk to say that it is not their place to convince people to take it all literal or discard literal interpretation. They simply allow others to go down that path, but sympathize with those making claims of biblical or papal infallacy. Of course, I'm just talking about a small group I interract with..there is sure to be variation but the point is that many Catholics do work it out successfully and I admire them for it. When we can discard our prejudice that the catholic church was the "Churh of the Devil" interpretation from decades ago...and you look at how such a huge organization manages...we have a lot to learn from them. I have respect for them, from my point of view.My wife and I talked today about how the Church could possibly explicitly allow for nonliteral belief without destroying the faith of those who need literal belief. I suggested that the Catholics seem to have it worked out, but I really don't know.
To the point...if they can figure it out...so can mormons. We are just a little slow. Laggards, it seems.
To this point...that is what the story is celebrating about the hero of the story...he is able to not be held to teachings that keep him bound by rigid rules, even if the leader thinks it is best. And that is what I like about it, as nibbler compares it to the church. We too, even though the leaders are trying to keep us safe in the fold, I think we can shine and show that it doesn't have to be that way...even if culture makes it hard to be different.Token callback to the topic at hand: maybe The Ancient One did have this worked out, but Strange deduced too much before she could teach him that TBM needed more rigid rules than he did.
I still support SSM. I see nothing about it that bothers me. There is nothing in our culture that will support me in my position. I do not know how to articulate it to others to have them affirm it is ok for me to believe what I believe. But it does not mean I cannot have my view. In time, I think truth will be made known on what is acceptable to God. That is one example. Although the current of the culture may not go that way...I also find I can navigate (to some extent) my way without having to paddle upstream.