You look at the supporting evidence and contrary evidence, by going back to the oldest/best sources one has at one’s disposal (which do change over time; example Dead Sea Scrolls or archaelogy).
That is not re-examination or testing of the dogma in order to alter it. That is testing if you are willing to accept the dogma, which stays unchanged.
Let us say you discover the evidence that someone impersonated the resurrected Christ. Now you have two sets of evidence that are mutually exclusive: the evidence of the Church that Christ rose from the dead and the evidence that you found that it was an impersonator. You either believe one or the other. You don’t demand that the Church discards her evidence and replaces it with yours.
Are dogmas able to be demythologized? I always thought dogmas were settled.
Isn’t the original post about doctrine?
Big difference in my estimation.
Guess I’m confused with the interchange. Maybe I missed something.