It's no deception. Read it in context, especially together with the preceding chapter 27, and see.
If you read in context, you will see that, as you said, mormons do believe that 2 Nephi 28 was written many years before Christ, but you will also see that mormons believe in prophets and prophecies. As you can also see, 2 Nephi chapter 28 is believed by mormons to include a prophecy (of the prophet Nephi) about conditions before and at the time of Joseph Smith. Thus mormons who believe the Book of Mormon also believe that there existed "humble followers of Christ" after the apostles and before Joseph Smith.
Mormons do believe in a "complete apostasy" as you point out, and in the restoration of "the Church of Jesus Christ (of Latter-Day Saints)" as they call it, which they believe is the only current "true and living" church, that is, the only current one authorized by God. Thus although according to mormons there were "humble followers of Christ" before Smith, mormons do not believe in the churches such followers may have belonged to. You are perfectly correct on that point. This means, to mormons, that no church existed at the time of Joseph Smith, and no other church exists today, that is actually authorized by God to act in God's name, such as to perform baptisms recognized by God, for example. Mormons also believe that without such God-authorized baptism, voluntarily received, in this life (or in the next by means of a living proxy), people will be "damned" as stated in your previous quotation (although mormon "damnation" in this sense is more like Catholic "purgatory"). Mormons view such baptism as necessary but not sufficient, and view being "a humble follower of Christ" as equally (if not more) important. This is why mormons would see the statement that "non-mormons will be damned (and a good many mormons too)" more as a somewhat hyperbolic comment on the authority of existing churches than as a comment about the people (individual Christian believers) themselves, as such people may well be among the "humble followers of Christ."
Belief in an exclusive authorization of God is understandably offensive to some, but mormons are not alone in believing in some kind of exclusive religious authority, and why would they believe in a "restoration" of Christ's church and authority anyway, if they didn't believe also in a need for such a restoration?
What mormons do not believe is that there were no "humble followers of Christ" at the time of and before Joseph Smith, or that members of other churches are themselves "corrupt" or "abominable," or even that leaders of all churches everywhere anytime between the apostles and Joseph Smith are or were corrupt.
If you go read Joseph Smith History 1 as a whole to get the "professors" term in context, you will see that, in context, "professors" is used synonymously with "preacher(s)", "men of high standing", and "great ones of the leading sects of the day." (See for example, verses 21-24.) Given this use in context, it seems likely that Smith had these same people in mind in your quotation about the hope of salvation. But regardless of that, not only do mormons understand the "professors" of the Joseph Smith History reference you orginally pointed to (1:18-20) to refer specifically to leaders of churches, they also understand it to refer to the specific leaders of the specific churches or congregations of the particular time and place. You will also see that it appears to be these "professors" who "teach for doctrines the precepts of men."
As you point out, mormons sing hymns from many of the great protestant hymn writers. Further, mormon leaders have also acknowledged a debt of gratitude to various protestant reformers, including Luther and the Wesley brothers and others. Mormons also seem frequently to quote from C. S. Lewis. This all seems inconsistent with mormons believing that all non-mormon Christian believers are "corrupt" or "abominable."
The reason for the inconsistency is simply that mormons generally (and presumably Glenn Beck in particular) just do not believe that all non-mormon Christian believers are "corrupt" or "abominable."
As I see your argument, the outline is (1) mormons believe X Y Z; (2) X Y Z is bad or dangerous or offensive; (3) so we should call them (including Glenn Beck) on it (or should not take them seriously, or should treat them as mentally suspect, or should get angry at them, or should be suspicious of their motives, or whatever). Some posters have disagreed with number (3) or number (2). Some have probably agreed with all. I am just disagreeing with some of your points under number (1), that's all.
What mormons do not believe is that there were no “humble followers of Christ” at the time of and before Joseph Smith, or that members of other churches are themselves “corrupt” or “abominable,” or even that leaders of all churches everywhere anytime between the apostles and Joseph Smith are or were corrupt.
_________________________________________________
Then they dont believe Joeey Smith...
and they dont believe their own prophets...
The main issue you're responding to is not my claims about "authorization" of the Mormon church. I mean, sure, we could get into that. In fact, I chose to at the end (see below). But that's not what our discussion has been about. It's been about the supposed "withdrawn authorization" of the church of Jesus Christ, as started by Jesus Christ -- and one which He promised the gates of hell would not prevail against. Did Jesus tell the truth in Matt. 18:16 or not?
Or when the apostle Paul said that this church would give glory to God "throughout all generations" (Eph. 3:21) -- did He tell the truth or not?
Or when the Holy Spirit told the apostle Paul in 1 Tim. 4:1 that only "some" would depart from the faith -- not "all" at any given point -- was the Holy Spirit correct or mistaken?
Even the word "restoration" is a misnomer. If I "restore" an old house, I haven't torn it down, leaving empty property for 1500-1800 years, only to rebuild it from scratch on that same property 1800 years later. Yet, Mormonism claims the true people of God totally exited for that period of time. And you acknowledged this: Mormons do believe in a "complete apostasy" as you point out, and in the restoration of "the Church of Jesus Christ (of Latter-Day Saints)" as they call it, which they believe is the only current "true and living" church, that is, the only current one authorized by God.
...to mormons, that no church existed at the time of Joseph Smith, and no other church exists today, that is actually authorized by God to act in God's name.
Well, this has long been my definition of a cult leader: Someone who is not divine yet whom claims to have a monopoly on all truth while all others are wrong in the eyes of God. The LDS church proclaims to be the "one true church" (see Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 14:9-10) and in fact, theologically, according to this passage only recognizes two churches -- the true one and the Satanic counterfeit. (Guess who LDS label as the true "Lamb of God" church and who by default thereby falls under the broad Satanic umbrella?)
As I see your argument, the outline is (1) mormons believe X Y Z...I am just disagreeing with some of your points under number (1), that's all.
your words: ...the "creeds" were an abomination in God's sight [post #310]
Well, we seem to agree Joseph Smith says "X" about the Christian beliefs -- that they are 100% "putrid" in Smith's nostrils
your words, part ii: ...no church existed at the time of Joseph Smith, and no other church exists today, that is actually authorized by God to act in God's name... [post #514]
Well, we seem to agree Joseph Smith says "Y" about the Christian church -- that ALL are unjoinable.
your words, part iii: Mormons do believe in a "complete apostasy" as you point out... [post #514]
Well, we seem to agree Joseph Smith says "Z" about Christians being apostates of apostate churches across the board.
So what is it we're supposedly disagreeing with again? (Oh, yeah, the appendix to X,Y,Z -- who qualifies as "corrupt" ) You say "preachers" and leading sect teachers. All I can say is, nice generic sweep. When the God of the Old Testament condemned leaders, he was usually specific. (Not so, re: Smith's god).
BTW, didn't you contradict yourself from your post #493 vs. post #514? ...according to Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon, almost all had gone astray, that is, "professors of Christianity" (believers, for the sake of this discussion) "generally" had gone astray... [post #493]
Then, in post #514, you said "Mormons do believe in a 'complete apostasy'. Which is it? "Almost all" or "complete?"
Finally, as for "authorization," the Mormon god has no final authorization to award to authorize anyone on his own. He always been beholden to a higher god -- a "council of gods" who were before him. At one point, he was mere man with no authority. He is not an ultimate god; there is no "buck stops here" authority within him. That is not so with the Christian God. He is Alpha and Omega; none are before Him; none are beside Him. (Isaiah 43; 44; 45). All ultimate authority rests with Him!