This is one of the dangers of this forum and one of the blessings as well, depending on your point of view. When I first started visiting this forum, my wife was concerned that I would encounter ideas or points of view that would prevent me from making "progress"—defined in her terms as coming to a strong conviction of the literal truth of the Church. And I have come across things that I didn't know before (the Kinderhoek plates, for one). Yet I have come to feel that a belief or an idea isn't worth having if it can't be challenged. If I have faith that isn't rooted well, that will come crumbling down the moment I find out about X (replace X with whatever is challenging you right now), I don't see the value in that faith.hope wrote:Yesterday I began reading recent threads and my mind is officially blown. I thought I was making 'progress' in my faith journey... and now I wonder what is real?
As Curtis points out, doubt is also the precursor to true faith—defined in my terms as hoping and/or believing in something that you cannot know or prove with 100% certainty.Curtis wrote:Losing certainty can be scary - but I believe it also is the only path to rediscovering pure faith. Another central Gospel paradox.
I find this challenging as well. In terms of the temple recommend interview, I strongly believe that the man asking the questions, and the men who wrote the questions, expect that when I say yes, I believe in God, that I believe in a literal, physical God. I know some believe that the questions are meant to be vague and open to interpretation, but I feel that's just a rationalization. Anyway, that's another topic that I think I'll open later. I don't meant to get this one off on a tangent.Roadrunner wrote:It's taken a lot of mental effort to convince myself that I can interpret doctrine as I see fit.