The article on carm.org “A Logical Proof that Mormonism is False”, reasons as follows (paraphrased):

Mormonism teaches an infinite regression of causes

An infinite regression of causes is logically impossible because you cannot cross an infinity

If something contains a logical impossibility, it cannot be true.

This is logical proof that Mormonism is false.

The actual claim that it is impossible to cross an infinity is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of infinities and the “first member” in an infinite set.

In his paper: Moreland on the Impossibility of Traversing the Infinite: A Critique, Felipe Leon said:

Moreland’s unique arguments against beginningless traversals depend upon one or more of the following dubious assumptions: that all traversals require a start or a first member; that any series formed by successive addition is (at least initially) a potential infinite; that traversing a beginningless past must involve the transformation of a potential infinite into an actual infinite; and that it’s just as easy or hard to traverse a sequence in one direction as it is to traverse it in the other.

…by the very nature of the case, a beginningless series has no beginning point from which it “got started”. For if such a past is possible — which is the very issue under dispute — then it has always been going, in the sense that for every event, there is another event that preceded it.

^{1}

Similarly, Blake Ostler has said:

Just what does it mean to “traverse” an infinite time or to “arrive” at the present? If “traverse” means to “pass through” or “complete” a temporal series beginning with an event and ending with an event – as I believe the term implies – then the infinite past cannot be traversed in this sense. However, the argument then would not apply to the infinite past since the infinite past has no beginning term.

Since we begin with the present event, the infinity is merely potential and is in fact never completed. In fact, it is no infinity at all but merely an open-ended finite series

(It does not) follow that no event could ever arrive because there will always be one more event which “had to happen first.” All that follows is that there is in fact an event that preceded the present event, and an event before that and so on.

^{2}

So no logical proof that Mormonism is false has been given here.

- Felipe Leon. 2011. Moreland on the Impossibility of Traversing the Infinite: A Critique. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.academia.edu/1163168/_Moreland_on_the_Impossibility_of_Traversing_the_Infinite_A_Critique_. [Accessed 7 August 2016].[↑]
- Blake Ostler. 2016. Do Kalam Infinity Arguments Apply to the Infinite Past?. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.fairmormon.org/reviews_of_the_new-mormon-challenge/do-kalam-infinity-arguments-apply-to-the-infinite-past. [Accessed 7 August 2016].[↑]