Actually, Terry, I really hadn't noticed that you never argue using Bible references. You're right, though. It's often possible to argue opposite positions using the Bible, and no one is generally willing to concede his position. I think that sometimes, however, one side is more strongly supported than the other, and I think that's the case in this instance.
Well, when you put it that way, I agree. However, I think it's maybe more important than you might think. (Not specifically what God looks like, but what kind of a being He is.) In the minds of many people, this one issue, in and of itself, is reason enough to exclude Mormons from the Christian community. The nature of God was evidently important enough for the 4th and 5th century Christians to have hotly debated the issue and come up with a creed describing the Father, Son and Holy Ghost as a single "substance." (Whatever this "substance" is, though, no one has ever been able to tell me.) Most of us agree that Jesus Christ ascended into Heaven in bodily form. So, if He still has that body (I presume He does), I don't see how He can be part of an incorporeal substance.
Okay... Nobody's interested. I'm satisfied as to why.