Simon Belmont wrote:jon wrote:
So, the Book of Mormon by this standard becomes anti-Mormon then...
Oh you must think you're just so damn funny.
Har har.
I thought of it as well becuase it does fit his criteria even by apologist standards. If you are going to use another stupid Farms article then you should expect others to expose just how stupid his logic is. Now not all Farms articles are bad, but this one has to be one of the worst. It's not a surprise that SB would think it is good. If you are going to define anti-Mormon so broadly you are going to lose all meaning and even LDS publications and members end up being included as anti-Mormon.