Surface response: under no circumstances should anyone be obligated to read that book (or any religious text that I know of).
Deeper response: you made a foolish promise. Skimming the thread, I conclude that you escaped, this time. Your interlocutor hardly confronted your characterization of his "evidence"; he or she just dug up more cached apologia.
I'd have recommended breaking your commitment if I'd judged you'd failed, so I have no ulterior motive.
I mostly agree with this comment, but breaking commitments is bad. I used a coin flip to give you an expected one-half downvotes.
In this comment thread, I stated that
In the resulting thread five evidences were given, and some back-and-forth occurred. Being myself somewhat biased, I feel unfit to judge if Arandur actually showed that a non-Mormon's skepticism is unwarranted.
So you, who wish to become stronger, I ask: please comment below whether or not you believe the proposition was satisfied.
Remember! This is not a vote on whether the evidence is factually correct or not!
Remember! This is not a chance to anonymously signal your agreement or disagreement with the LW hive mind!
Remember! If the sky is green, wish to believe that the sky is green!
I don't know what else I can say to forestall thread hijacking.