That reminds me of an interesting encounter on my mission. My companion and I were eating in a little coffee shop and a whole troop of Jehovah’s Witnesses sat down next to us.

One guy was obviously the most eloquent of them and did most of the talking. He asked us what Mormons think about particular issues and we gave him our best answer, but admitted that Mormonism was kind of vague on those particular topics.

The guy informed me that his religion had very concrete answers to those questions, and wondered why I would be willing to stick with a religion that doesn’t have all the answers.

Of course, this comment really bugged me, because I thought my religion DID have all the answers.

Recently, however, I’ve been viewing religion as the structure that helps you dwell in mysteries rather than solve them.

In the end, Job and Ecclesiastes invite you and me to set aside our certainties and our false certainties.

I’ve had to drop many pseudo-certainties along the path of spiritual growth. But my core certainties regarding the reality and nature of God, the power of the atonement, the legitimacy of the Church, etc. have only grown deeper in the process.

I don’t think we should suggest that testimonies are counterproductive to gaining knowledge–I believe the opposite is true. But for many of us, the ways we interpret and apply our testimonies will need to evolve over time, and if we
cling too tightly to our outer layers of certainty, we can do ourselves harm.

There’s a short story in the soon-to-be published issue of Irreantum called “Calling and Election” that tackles the very question you asked about what God requires us to give up. (You remember that story, don’t you Stephen? You were on that fiction contest committee.) I’ll be very interested to see how that particular story is received.