Is Joseph Smith a prophet like the Apostle Paul?
Even if you’re not a Christian, I doubt I need to introduce you to the Apostle Paul, the guy who wrote most of the New Testament. I’m sure you know his story: as Saul, he was a violent Christian persecutor up until this encounter that is recorded in the book of Acts:
“Now Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest, and asked for letters from him to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, both men and women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. As he was traveling, it happened that he was approaching Damascus, and suddenly a light from Heaven flashed around him; and he fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?’ And he said, ‘Who are You, Lord?’ And He said, ‘I am Jesus whom you are persecuting, but get up and enter the city, and it will be told you what you must do.’ The men who traveled with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one” (Acts 9:1–7).
As Christians, we acknowledge this as a true, miraculous event and accept it without reservation. But did you know there’s another man who claims he had a near exact same experience?
Get Our Latest News for FREE
His name is Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism. Here’s the account in his own words:
“It was on the morning of a beautiful, clear day, early in the spring of eighteen hundred and twenty … I kneeled down and began to offer up the desires of my heart to God. I had scarcely done so, when immediately I was seized upon by some power which entirely overcame me, and had such an astonishing influence over me as to bind my tongue so that I could not speak … I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me … When the light rested upon me, I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other — This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!”
And what was Smith told? He continues: “I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right … I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight.”
And voilà, after that encounter, Mormonism was supposedly off and running.
Smith directly compares his reported vision with Paul’s and says: “I have thought since, that I felt much like Paul … some said he was dishonest, others said he was mad … So it was with me.”
Because Mormonism differs greatly from orthodox Christianity, you see the conundrum, right? Paul says he had a vision from God/Christ and Joseph Smith claims one too. Are they both telling the truth? Is one or both of them lying? Is one or both self-deceived?
Mormon apologists (along with religious skeptics) consistently challenge Christians on why they believe Paul’s account but not Smith’s. It’s a question that even top Christian apologist William Lane Craig calls, “in principle a good objection.”
That said, as Christians, what kind of reasonable responses can we provide to counter Smith’s claim?
One of these things is not like the other, one of these things doesn't belong
Let’s start at the beginning. Both Paul and Smith say their commissioning by God began with their initial visions. With Paul, this is evident as he relates his story up front, multiple times with both the Jews and Roman authorities, with the early source material being found independently in both Luke’s Gospel and Paul’s epistles.
When it comes to Mormonism, it can’t be overstated how much weight the Mormon church puts on Smith’s account. The church goes so far as to say: “Joseph Smith’s first vision stands today as the greatest event in world history since the birth, ministry, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.”
To quote Ace Ventura: “alrighty, then.”
So, if that’s the case, you’d imagine that Smith and the early Mormon leaders would have had his vision story front and center right from the beginning, just like Paul, and laid it as their bedrock.
But they didn’t.
Dr. Robert Bowman highlights this issue, along with a plethora of other problems with Smith’s claims, in his academic paper, Paul and Joseph: Comparing Paul’s Witness to the Resurrection to Joseph Smith’s Visions. In his ~40-page paper, Bowman goes into great detail to show that 1. Smith’s first vision story was developed by him in the 1830s — a full 10+ years after the supposed encounter — and remained unknown to Mormons and their critics until 1842, and 2. The history of written statements that describe Smith’s initial revelatory visions exhibits clear evidence of trial/error storytelling and theological development.
In short, Bowman provides compelling evidence that Smith made the whole thing up.
Bowman discusses the fact that the basic elements of Smith’s first vision story — the appearance of divine beings along with the message that Christianity was apostate — were part of Smith’s religious upbringing and reflected religious beliefs already in place in his cultural context. In other words, there was no stark and differentiated message delivered to Smith; on the contrary, it was accepted societal beliefs at that time and place.
While Mormon apologists try to explain away this fact and the various rolling historical discrepancies in Smith’s account, and the absence of Smith ever mentioning it early on, Bowman says, “The simpler explanation is that Joseph simply invented the story of the First Vision in the 1830s after he had founded the LDS Church. The origins of Mormonism are entirely explicable without the First Vision. The story itself drew on popular religious beliefs of the period, especially the primitivist belief that Christianity had become apostate and needed to be restored.”
Keep in mind Smith’s first revelation is one of some 76 supposed visionary experiences he claimed to have over 25 years (1820-1944). On this point, Bowman says: “To put the matter bluntly, Joseph Smith was either a fraud or a far greater visionary than anyone in the Bible.”
After breaking down all the issues with Smith’s account, and discussing the dubious character of the man which is widely acknowledged among historians, Bowman sums up the distinction between Paul and Smith by saying: “The apostle Paul’s vision of Jesus Christ on the road to Damascus enjoys rich evidential support and is critical as an explanation for his dramatic about-face from persecutor of the church to apostle to the Gentiles. By contrast, the prophet Joseph Smith’s vision of Jesus Christ and God the Father in the woods near his upstate New York home in 1820 is not only sorely lacking in evidence but is utterly lacking in credibility on a wide array of fronts. Christians are more than consistent in accepting Paul’s story but not Joseph’s.”
Bowman’s conclusion is not a mere ad hominem attack against Smith but rather another set of evidence that speaks negatively to the trustworthiness of a man who supposedly experienced “the greatest event in world history since the birth, ministry, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.” If Smith is lying, then countless people are following error that is leading to a far different eternity than they expect.
In addition to Bowman’s evidence, what crosses Smith off the list of God’s true prophets for me is his blatant plagiarism of the 1611 King James Bible into the Book of Mormon. If you weren’t aware, Mormons claim that around 322 A.D., a prophet named Mormon compiled a history from the ancient records written by prophets into one set of golden plates, which God supposedly guided Smith to in 1827.
At issue is the fact that there are numerous direct quotations (both Old and New Testament) in the Book of Mormon from the 1611 King James Bible, which Mormons admit to. While they try and explain away this issue, none in my opinion can justify how a book supposedly written in 322 A.D. contains whole passages from books like Isaiah that come from the King James Bible, which was written many centuries later.
Remember also that the King James Bible belongs to a class of Bible translations known as “literal/formal equivalence” (other examples include the NASB), which is a word-for-word or sentence-by-sentence translation from the original languages. To assist in readability, the translators at that time inserted words into the inspired text, which are identified by being cast in italics.
And what do you find in the Book of Mormon with the mirrored Isaiah passages and others from the KJV? The italicized words.
So, when we make a philosophical appeal to the best explanation to try and explain why this is the case, we are really left with just two options:
Option 1: God valued the King James Bible translators' work so much that He supernaturally altered the Mormon golden plates after they were written to include the italicized words inserted into the 1611 KJV, or he guided the hands of the KJV translators so that they would include the same words that were on the Mormon tablets.
Option 2: Joseph Smith plagiarized the 1611 King James Bible.
Which makes more sense to you?
These facts, along with Bowman’s evidence say that, in the end, no, Joseph Smith is not a prophet like the Apostle Paul and his deception needs to be more widely understood and discarded by those who think otherwise.
Robin Schumacher is an accomplished software executive and Christian apologist who has written many articles, authored and contributed to several Christian books, appeared on nationally syndicated radio programs, and presented at apologetic events. He holds a BS in Business, Master's in Christian apologetics and a Ph.D. in New Testament. His latest book is, A Confident Faith: Winning people to Christ with the apologetics of the Apostle Paul.
