What I've Learned from Anti-Mormons-aka Critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
The Protestants may have been vitriolic at one time but it has long been replaced for the most part as it was based on doctrinal practice. Critics of the Mormon church have a different dialogue of misleading some with vitriolic narratives. They mix facts with a lack of historical and cultural context, outright lies and a heavy dose of opinionated nonsense that they believe without any basis other than hearing it and needing it to support their position in the anti world.
Some religious professors at the time of Joseph Smith didn't like his testimony that had received a vision. Was his unique among those that have claimed to have some special religious experience or vision? His initial critics started out as simply anti-Joseph Smith in 1820 and adapted their dialogue as time passed and Joseph continue to reveal truths from heaven.
There was no Mormon church until 1830. When it was known that he claimed to have new scripture the narratives turned to anti-Book of Mormon. These tactics were geared at discrediting Joseph Smith and his prophetic ministry because there was no way to prove his calling wasn't from God.
In testing their opinions I have seen the opposition these folks give us. These critics don't like the church for whatever reason and in their own internal thinking believe that their active criticisms will somehow damage the church. This opposition has been taking place since Joseph Smith first told of his experience and answer to his prayer for guidance.
The intent of these folks is to get people out of Mormonism, not to help them in any other way. They may have doctrinal differences and they may act like they are disputing doctrines but they have nothing to offer but their opinions. They have no authority from God for their actions.
Bible Scholars only offer opinions of the the scripture with no particular authority. Joseph claimed that he had authority to restore the true church of Jesus Christ. Since they couldn't prove his testimony as false they sought to discredit him as a person. This was much before polygamy ever became an issue to throw on the fire of discredit.
They repeat non-factual opinions like Mormons are not Christian, Joseph Smith was a pervert and a con man. None of which have basis in any truth. They call the church is a cult and the church's' current prophet leaders somehow have the power to brainwash millions of people and force them into lives of blind faith. Their declarations are quite ridiculous when you analyse them for what they are, just opinions repeated over and over.
Knowing something of how Mormon teachings and those of mainstream Bible scholars are different is helpful to see how their narratives are developed around partial truths, falsehoods and sometimes an actual fact used in a contrived narrative.
They and others also present arguments against events and practices in church history that don't fit their illusion of what they think the church should be like. How is it that these few folks have questions that no one can answer and therefore the church is at fault? It doesn't change anything except that they give up their faith.
Modern mainstream churchgoers often attend in their beach clothes, listen to Bible themed rock and roll and head off to play. The temple ceremony would certainly come as a shock of strangeness to the large percentage of them.