“Well, if that’s not the “spirit of the age,” I don’t know what is. You’re saying “If something is true for you, fine. But if something radically in opposition then that, too, is true? Whatever’s true for you is fine; whatever’s true for me is fine, too?””
No, what I’m saying is that I respect your right to be wrong; and I ask that you respect my right to be wrong, too.
We’re not going to convince each other, so why get worked up over it?
Now you're confusing me. First you and Restornu emphasize "working out" our faith. But "working up" our faith is out of bounds?
If you'er not open to being convinced, then why do you ever bother to open Scripture or listen to a speaker? Why do you tune into the weatherman if he may not "convince" you, for example, about your opinion of the weather.
In other words, you're telling me that if Scripture is delivered to you in bite-sized portions from any hand other than one with "LDS" written on it, it's written off as being untrustworthy?
And then on the other side, I can never learn from talking to LDS about key issues as they cite Scripture?