The following are excerpts from:
Ron Rhodes and Marian Bodine, Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Mormons (Eugene, Oreg.: Harvest House Publishers, 1995)
It shows that the appeal to the "perspicuity" of Scripture by Protestants is indeed a shell game, and texts that disprove their theology (like Acts 2:38 and baptismal regeneration) are relegated to "difficult" and must be (radically) wrenched out of context because of "muh sola fide!!!!!" etc:
Acts 3:20-21
Evangelical Chrisitans have several interpretations of Acts 3:20-21. Many Bible expositors believe the reference deals with a restoration of Israel. After all, Peter is speaking specifically to the “men of Israel” in this sermon (see Acts 3:12), and he speaks of the fulfillment of all that the prophets had foretold (verse 18).
Craig S. Keener, in his helpful Bible Background Commentary, points out that “Jewish people expected Israel’s restoration; this was a central message of the Old Testament prophets (e.g., Is. 40:9-11; Jer. 32:42-44; Ezek. 37;21-28; Hos. 11:9-11; 14:4-7; Amos 9:11-15), and Peter seems to have it in view here.”
Other scholars take the reference to “restoration” or “restitution” more generally. These individuals believe that “the restitution of all things is to be understood as the day of judgment and of the consummation of the age when the Lord will return.”
Regardless of which interpretation, we can know with certainty what Acts 3:20-21 does not say. The text and surrounding context do not even remotely hint that there would be a total apostasy of the entire church. Mormons are simply reading into the text that is not there. This is called eiseogesis (reading a meaning back into a text), as opposed to exegesis (drawing the meaning out of the text). (Reasoning, 44-45; Rhodes is in the habit of spelling eisegesis as exogesis)
Gen 1:26-27
Genesis 1:26-27 is not referring to man being created in the physical image of God. (Ibid., 224)
Exo 33:11
The description of Moses speaking to God “face to face” cannot be taken to mean that God actually has a physical face that Moses saw with his physical eyes. (Ibid., 227)
Such language is not to be taken literally. Though the Bible speaks of God as though He had a face, the Bible clearly teaches that God is a spiritual being and should not be depicted by any likeness whatever. (Exodus 20:4). (Ron Rhodes, The 10 Most Important Things You Can Say to a Mormon [Eugene, Oreg.: Harvest House Publishers, 2001], 50)
Heb 1:3/Acts 7:55-56 and the “right hand of God”
The phrase “right hand” does not in any way suggest that the Father has a body of flesh and bones. (Reasoning 235-36)
As we learned earlier, the phrase “right hand” does not in any way suggest that the father has a body of flesh and bones. In the Jewish mind, the right hand simply referred to the place of honor. (Ibid., 261)
Acts 2:38
Admittedly, Acts 2:38 is not an easy verse to interpret. But a basic principle of Bible interpretation is to interpret difficult passages in light of the easy, clear verses. We should never build a theology on difficult passages alone. (Ibid., 328)
Mark 16:16
This is another difficult passage to interpret. But again, a basic principle of Bible interpretation is to interpret the difficult passages in light of the easy, clear verses. (Ibid., 332)
1 Peter 3:18-19
As we mentioned earlier, we must interpret difficult passages like this according to the clearer passages of Scripture. (Ibid., 352-53)
1 Peter 4:6
This is another difficult verse that we must interpret in light of what clearer verses of Scripture teach. (Ibid., 354)