Jeff Durbin:

There is no coherent appeal to reason or the laws of logic apart from the Revelation of God. You cannot satisfy the preconditions necessary for the intelligibility of the laws of logic apart from the triune-God of Scripture. No other worldview can provide a cogent appeal to immaterial, invariant, necessary, abstract laws like the laws of logic. As image bearers of God, we will use them and appeal to them. However, there can be no meaningful justification for these laws outside of the Revelation of God. Atheism cannot provide it and neither can Mormonism.

God’s Revelation provides the grounding for reason/laws of logic. That grounding is found in God’s own eternal nature and character. God is Spirit (and therefore immaterial – John 4:24), God cannot lie (and therefore cannot engage in contradiction – Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18), God does not change (Hebrews 13:8; James 1:17), God is omnipresent (Jeremiah 23:23-24; Proverbs 15:3), God provides the foundation for believing the laws of logic are consistent everywhere and at all times (Colossians 1:17), and the triune-God revealed in Scripture provides the foundation and answer to the ancient philosophical conflict of the “one and the many” (providing a foundation for “class concepts”, distinctions, and unity).

Trying to engage questions about truth and reason apart from the Revelation of God puts the Mormon in no better place than the militant Atheist who believes that all that exists is a material universe with nothing spiritual/immaterial and is essentially “sound and fury signifying nothing”. Again, Mormons will appeal to laws of logic because they are in the image of God and can’t live in God’s world otherwise. However, the Mormon’s degradation of Scripture and abandonment of biblical revelation as the principium forces them into incoherence along with the unbeliever. The Mormon god, who is just another part of the *material* universe, who has a god above him (with standards above him he has to obey), who is not ominpresent, who does not “hold all things together”, who changes, does not provide a foundation for a cogent justification of abstract, immaterial, unchanging entities like the laws of logic.

Since Mormons have abandoned God’s Revelation as supreme, they have also abandoned any coherence when appealing to laws of logic.

Reject God’s Word as foundational (as the Mormons do) and lose laws of logic with it.

However, the Mormon won’t stop appealing to laws of logic and reason because they can’t while living in God’s world. They will borrow from what they can only truly have in a biblical worldview all the while denying the God Who provides the foundation and meaning to those things. So when the Mormon says, “I believe we should appeal to Scripture and reason” it needs to be asked:

“How do you justify any appeal to logic and reason as a Mormon who rejects Scripture as the principium (Mormon revelation is supreme), with a god and worldview that cannot provide the foundation for those things, and who tells us that the god of Scripture is a ‘monster’ (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 372)?”