The doctrine of the Assumption of Mary was once a huge obstacle to converting. I kept asking myself "But what is the evidence for it." Of course, that's a perfectly good question, but I was ignoring the evidence. What I was really asking myself was "What is the evidence outside of the Magisterium for the doctrine?"
But that the Magisterium teaches it
is evidence! All the evidence I had for the identity of the Church *was* evidence for the doctrine. Since I had good evidence for that and no good evidence against the doctrine, it ceased to be a problem.
Consider this analogy. Some evils seem utterly unredeemable: we just can't imagine how good could come of them. What's the evidence that the will be redeemed?
All the evidence for a just God *is* evidence that all evils will be redeemed.
This is just an application of what epistemologists call epistemic closure. I wish I would have realized that sooner.