The Flood was a world-wide event = The Flood was a world-wide event
1. Many creationists "accept the existence of the Geologic Column and seek to interpret it in terms of a sequence of events that might have occurred during the Flood. This is the approach taken by Institute for Creation Research creationists such as Andrew Snelling, Steven A. Austin and Kurt Wise, as well as Creation Ministries International" (wiki). . . . and so on and so on covering all the flood issues: Fossilization, Fossil layering, Frozen mammoths, Liquefaction, Radiometric dating, Submarine canyon formation.
2. A large contingency of Christians believe that the terminology used in Genesis allows for a LOCAL flood, rather than a global one (see HERE
). If you take this approach, which is perfectly fine, then the whole issue of a global flood vanishes.
In other words there is an answer to everything. Now, whether those answers are good enough for any particular person, is another issue. The same can be said of Mormonism. For example, the answers provided by the likes of FARM apologists and FAIR folks are good enough for some -- not for others. For me, to be honest, I find the excuses for LDS beliefs to be lacking in substance far more than the explanations given by Christians for many of their beliefs. Case in point, the above issue you noted.
The Book of Mormon contains the inerrant Word of God = The Bible contains the inerrant Word of God
Again, we are talking degrees of plausibility here. The BOM can be shown as fraudulent in so many ways it's not funny, using linguistics, grammar, history, archeology, etc. etc. etc. It's clearly, at least to me, not at all what the LDS church purports it to be. The Bible, on the other hand, seems far more likely to be the Word of God than the BOM. What I am talking about here is the differences between likelihood of various assertions. Even if you want to maintain that for you it is still unlikely that the Bible is God's Word, I think it is inaccurate to say that both the Bible and the BOM are equally as unlikely to be God's Word.
God prefers men to be His messengers = God prefers men to be His messengers
Not quite sure why this would be prepostrous at all, whether we are talking about Christianity or Mormonism. If there is a God, he could pretty much choose to do anything he wanted to do -- including communicate to his created beings via other created beings. And, of course, the way you phrase this assertion, it is not really accurate. I don't think anything in Mormonism or Christianity states that God "prefers" men to be his messengers. Both belief systems merely say that he does use men, as well as angels, visions, dreams, and prophecy.
Masturbation is wrong = Masturbation is wrong
LOL. Well, that's more of an American/Puritan thing, truth be told, and is really not addressed at all in the Bible. And I certainly have never found anything about masterbation in the Creeds of Christendom (he sez blushing).