Explanation and Disclaimer: Worst of the Anti-Mormon Web asks the question: How come Loftes Tryk is not on the web? Well, now it turns out that Loftes is on the web. Oh well.

If you are humor-impaired, leave immediately. This is not for the faint-of-heart, the thin-skinned, or especially humorless anti-Mormons. If you are a humorless anti-Mormon, this site is intended to mock you—I am laughing at you.

Worst of the Anti-Mormon Web appears occasionally—that is, whenever I feel like it. Anything regular was just a bit too much work and hence simply does not agree with my fundamental constitution.

Need to see the archive editions? Click back there.

Confused by what you see? Did you think that this site would be 1) full of anti-Mormon stuff beating up on helpless Mormons or 2) full of Latter-day Saint stuff beating up on antis? Be sure to read the Infrequently Asked Questions. And please be sure to read it before you blast some email my way. I know reading is tough and the web does nothing to encourage attention spans, but I am confident that everyone who can handle a browser can read and understand this short file. (For those who want to object to this outrageous claim, I can only counter that there is no real evidence that Ed Decker or John L. Smith surf the web.)

Questions, comments, criticism? Want to submit your favorite bigoted, biased anti-Mormon site for a glorious "WORST" award? Send email to Gary Novak [Gary is no longer accepting e-mail regarding this site]. If you are an incensed anti-Mormon, please please, please send me email. I will be only too glad to post your note here [defunct].

Worst of the
Anti-Mormon Web

Today's Worst comes from a mysterious anti-Mormon with the moniker, "Dr. Shades." I have no idea why he does not use his real name. After reading his webpages I am tempted to ask, "what is he trying to hide?"

So here is "Dr. Shades" entertaining commentary on the Priesthood and Relief Society Manual. Allow me the indulgence of responding to his criticism, point by point.

  1. No, the words have not been changed. In fact, the manual is making exactly the opposite point of that of "Dr. Shades": the text is indeed reliable and accurate. To answer the good doctor's rhetorical question, there is nothing to hide.
  2. A cursory glance at almost any page will reveal that most of the quotations come from the Journal of Discourses and Discourses of Brigham Young. For example, when I turned randomly to page 105, all of the quotations came from Discourses of Brigham Young. Both of these items are still in print and are easily available from Deseret Book and many other LDS booksellers and both are available on CD ROM. How come "Dr. Shades" does not know this? I happen to own both. However, it should be obvious to even "Dr. Shades", if he had taken the time to read something from the manual, that teaching a priesthood or relief society lesson does not require the full source. The quotations from the manual are extensive and seldom contain ellipses. Again, to answer the good doctor's rhetorical question, there is nothing to hide.

Finally, you take an evangelical anti-Mormon site and republish some old, ill-informed and out-of-date anti-Mormon materials and you get The Fundamentals - Volume 4 Mormonism: Its Origin, Characteristics, and Doctrines. And what does this fine publication have to offer? Why nothing other than Hurlbut, Howe and the Spalding theory. Now that is funny.

At the bottom of the page you will find a link to "Have You Considered This? What you need to consider is their alternative to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. You will need to scroll to near the bottom (to the section titled, "An Immediate Opportunity"), but you too can discover quick and easy salvation in Cheap Grace. Can anyone say, "Lord, Lord?"