🔥 Joseph Smith vs. Jesus Christ
Two Different Voices. Two Different Gospels. One Truth.
This is not a personality comparison. It’s a spiritual reckoning.
Jump to Section:
Introduction
Joseph Smith claimed divine authority, introduced new revelations, and redefined the path to salvation. Jesus Christ is the eternal Son of God, the final Word, and the only way to the Father.
This page does not exist to mock, shame, or debate. It exists to expose a counterfeit — not by opinion, but by the authority of Scripture, which provides the clear standard by which all spiritual claims must be tested.
“I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”
— John 14:6
“Even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse.”
— Galatians 1:8
Joseph Smith’s teachings contradict the gospel of Jesus Christ — not only in detail, but in foundation, posture, and purpose. This page will examine:
• Who they claimed to be
• What they taught about God
• How they defined salvation
• How they treated the righteous
• What legacy they left behind
If the fruit of Joseph Smith’s doctrine reflects rebellion, pride, and spiritual inversion, then it must be named — not to win an argument, but to guard the truth and protect souls.
“Test every spirit.” — 1 John 4:1
“I will not give My glory to another.” — Isaiah 42:8
This is not about loyalty. It’s about truth. And truth demands a response.
🔥 Joseph Smith's Spiritual Journey Started with Troubling and Significant Error
Joseph Smith’s spiritual journey began not with repentance, conviction, or surrender to Christ, but with a question rooted in institutional confusion: “Which church is true?” This wasn’t a cry for salvation or holiness — it was a search for affiliation. There’s no historical evidence that he was seeking God in the biblical sense. His earliest accounts show no sign of gospel conviction, no spiritual brokenness, no regeneration — only disillusionment with denominations and a desire for spiritual authority.
Smith’s foundational posture wasn’t one of humility before God, but one of attack — even against the true people of God. In his letters and sermons, he didn’t merely challenge creeds — he condemned the faithful. He dismissed the legacy of Christians who upheld the gospel at great personal cost, casting them as deceived, corrupt, or apostate. This wasn’t theological refinement; it was spiritual inversion.
This troubling posture wasn’t just misguided — it inverted the very structure of biblical faith. And this wasn’t an isolated moment; it marked the beginning of a recurring pattern throughout Joseph Smith’s teachings.
What Is Spiritual Inversion?
Spiritual inversion is more than doctrinal error — it’s a reversal of God’s moral and theological order. It’s when someone:
• Condemns the righteous while elevating the self
• Replaces humility with supremacy
• Subverts grace with control
• Reframes holiness to serve personal authority
This isn’t just false teaching — it’s a counterfeit gospel with reversed values.
Note that Joseph Smith exempted himself from the very condemnation he pronounced, and without explanation.
His rhetoric wasn’t limited to doctrinal disagreement. His sweeping condemnation encompassed every denomination, preacher, and believer — yet he never applied that indictment to himself. Logically, if all were deceived, then he too should have been counted among them. But his rhetoric never acknowledges this. Instead, he cast himself as the exception — the sole vessel of truth emerging from a sea of error he claimed to be untouched by.
This is more than arrogance — it’s a distortion of divine calling. If Smith never belonged to Christ, why would God answer his prayers or grant him revelation? The historical record doesn’t show a man transformed by grace. It shows a man positioning himself as the answer to a problem he never spiritually understood.
🧠 Theological Implication
This pattern — elevating self while scorning the righteous — echoes Isaiah’s warning and Ezekiel’s indictment. It’s not just error; it’s rebellion cloaked in revelation.
It mirrors Isaiah 5:20 — calling evil good and good evil. If this spiritual inversion truly defines Smith’s posture, then it reinforces his pattern of attacking the righteous while elevating the self. This is a foundation of error.
This pattern also echoes Ezekiel 28 — where the King of Tyre didn’t merely exalt himself, but actively opposed the holy, corrupted wisdom, and defiled sanctuaries (Ezekiel 28:17-18).
Summary: This foundation of spiritual inversion — historically evident and theologically corrosive — sets Joseph's stage for the distortions that follow.
🔄 Reframing the Question: What Joseph Smith Should Have Asked
Joseph Smith’s spiritual journey began with a question rooted in institutional confusion: “Which church is true?” But this was not the question of a soul seeking God—it was the question of a man seeking authority. It lacked the humility, conviction, and surrender that mark genuine spiritual awakening.
Here’s how one might rightly respond to that moment.
Joseph Smith should have asked something like: “How do I get closer to You?” This alternative question — “How do I get closer to You?” — reflects the humility and surrender that were missing from Smith’s approach. It’s the kind of question that invites transformation, not self-exaltation.
And God might have responded with: “Know my Word. Seek Me with all your heart and soul. Draw near to Me, and I will draw near to you. Walk in humility, love truth, and listen to My Son. Trust in Me, and I will make your paths straight. Let My Word be a lamp to your feet. I will guide you.”
This is not mere supposition. Both the question and the response are deeply rooted in Scripture. While someone might phrase the question differently — the heart behind it remains the same: a desire to draw near to God in truth, humility, and surrender.
Scripture references:
2 Timothy 3:16–17
Psalm 119:105
Jeremiah 29:13
Deuteronomy 4:29
Micah 6:8
James 4:6
Proverbs 23:23
Zechariah 8:16
Matthew 17:5
John 10:27
Proverbs 3:5–6
Isaiah 30:21
Holiness and Wisdom: Missing Foundations
From the beginning, Joseph Smith’s spiritual posture lacked two essential biblical pillars: Holiness and Wisdom.
🕊️ Holiness
Scripture presents holiness as the defining attribute of God — His moral perfection, separateness from sin, and call for His people to reflect that purity (Leviticus 19:2; 1 Peter 1:15–16). Holiness is not just moral behavior; it’s alignment with God’s nature.
Joseph Smith’s revelations rarely emphasize holiness as a divine standard. Instead, they center on authority, ritual, and exaltation. The pursuit of godhood, temple ordinances, and celestial marriage overshadow the call to be holy as God is holy. This shift replaces sanctification with systemization — a gospel of progression rather than purification.
📖 Wisdom
Biblical wisdom is not cleverness or mystical insight — it’s the fear of the Lord, the beginning of understanding (Proverbs 9:10). It’s humility before God, discernment rooted in truth, and a life shaped by divine instruction.
Smith’s teachings often elevate secret knowledge, hidden revelations, and personal visions. But biblical wisdom is public, tested, and consistent with God’s Word. When wisdom is redefined as exclusive access or mystical authority, it ceases to be wisdom at all — it becomes spiritual elitism.
🔥 The Thread of Error
If Smith’s journey began without holiness or wisdom, then the thread of error runs through every doctrine that followed. Without holiness, there is no true sanctification. Without wisdom, there is no true discernment. And without both, there is no true gospel.
🙏🏻 The Prayer for Wisdom: A Misunderstood Beginning
One of the most emphasized steps in the LDS conversion process is the prayer for wisdom — often encouraged through Moroni 10:4, which invites seekers to ask God if the Book of Mormon is true. This prayer is positioned as the gateway to spiritual confirmation and entry into Mormonism.
But Scripture teaches that wisdom is not merely granted on request — it begins with belonging to God.
🧠 Biblical Wisdom Requires Regeneration
James 1:5 says, “If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God…” — but this promise is given only to believers. Wisdom is not a neutral gift handed out to anyone who asks. It is rooted in relationship, in reverence, and in regeneration. Without being born of the Spirit, one cannot receive the wisdom that comes from above (1 Corinthians 2:14).
See The Gospel of Christ which differs significantly from the "Gospel" of the LDS. This distinction underscores the difference between the biblical Gospel of Christ — rooted in grace, holiness, and transformation — and the LDS version, which centers on confirmation, ritual, and progression.
🕊️ The Fear of the Lord Is the Beginning
Proverbs 9:10 declares, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.” This fear is not terror — it’s reverent awe, surrender, and recognition of God’s holiness. It’s the posture of one who knows they are spiritually bankrupt and in need of grace.
💔 True Wisdom Begins in Brokenness
Biblical wisdom doesn’t begin with curiosity or ritual — it begins with a broken heart and a contrite spirit (Psalm 51:17; Isaiah 66:2). It’s marked by sorrow over sin, not just desire for answers. It’s not a quest for confirmation — it’s a cry for transformation.
🔥 Theological Implication
If someone prays for wisdom without belonging to God, without reverence, and without repentance, they are not promised divine insight. They may feel emotional affirmation — but without regeneration, they will not receive spiritual truth. The LDS emphasis on praying for confirmation bypasses the biblical prerequisites for wisdom — and in doing so, invites spiritual deception.
The commonly cited “burning in the bosom” (Doctrine and Covenants 9:8) is often interpreted as spiritual confirmation, but it is fundamentally a physical sensation — a feeling of the body, not a witness of the Spirit. Scripture teaches that the Holy Spirit convicts, sanctifies, and leads into truth (John 16:13), not through bodily warmth or emotional feelings, but through transformation, discernment, and alignment with God’s Word.
🔥 Condemning the Righteous: A Universal Accusation
Joseph Smith’s posture toward the body of Christ was not one of correction or reform — it was total condemnation. From his earliest accounts and revelations, he didn’t merely critique creeds or denominations. He accused every soul outside his authority of spiritual failure, corruption, and blindness.
“Behold, the world lieth in sin at this time, and none doeth good, no not one… they draw near to me with their lips, while their hearts are far from me.”
— Joseph Smith’s 1832 First Vision account
At first glance, this may sound biblical — but context is everything. Scripture does affirm the universal fallenness of man (Romans 3:10), but it also calls sinners to repentance, not to rejection. Smith’s version wasn’t a call to salvation — it was a sweeping dismissal, devoid of grace, invitation, or gospel hope. And if “none doeth good,” that includes Joseph Smith himself — a truth the LDS narrative conveniently ignores.
“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.”
— Joseph Smith’s 1838 First Vision account
This isn’t just a red flag — it’s a spiritual siren. If God were truly speaking, where is the call to repentance? The invitation to Christ? The offer of grace? The echo of holiness? Why would God focus on condemning creeds while speaking to a man who was about to replicate the same errors?
This wasn’t mere theological disagreement, it was spiritual isolationism — a posture that declared: “No one is righteous unless we say so.” It replaced humility with supremacy, and discernment with condemnation.
God’s pattern has always been a call to repentance — not rejection.
📜 The Scope of His Accusation
Joseph Smith’s early revelations issued a sweeping indictment of all believers, churches, and ministers. This condemnation was universal, not selective — and by its own logic, would include figures like the Three Nephites or John the Beloved, since no exceptions were made. This contradiction is rarely acknowledged — yet it undermines the internal logic of Smith’s own revelations.
Among those condemned were the truly sanctified — individuals who upheld Scripture, lived in obedience, and bore the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22–23; James 1:22). According to biblical standards, these are signs of genuine faith. Yet Smith rejected them not for sin or error, but simply for failing to align with his authority.
This marked the beginning of Smith’s positioning of himself as the sole vessel of truth — not in continuity with the faithful who came before, but in replacement of them. In doing so, his posture stood in direct contradiction to the Word of God, which consistently affirms the righteous (Matthew 5:8; Psalm 1:6) and calls believers into unity, not isolation (John 17:20–23; Ephesians 4:3–6).
“The world has no claim on the Saints. They are a distinct people, a peculiar people, a chosen generation.”
— Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith
This was a patchwork of Scripture — stitched together out of context, see 1 Peter 2:9, Deuteronomy 14:2, and Titus 2:14. In their original context, these verses describe God's covenant people walking in obedience and truth. Smith’s use of them detached the language from its biblical foundation and repurposed it to define his own followers. This kind of appropriation isn’t revelation — it’s redefinition.
🧠 Theological Implication
This posture mirrors the rebellion described in Isaiah 5:20 — “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil.” It’s not just error. It’s spiritual inversion: condemning the righteous while exalting the self.
It also echoes Ezekiel 28 — the King of Tyre didn’t just exalt himself; he opposed the holy, corrupted wisdom, and defiled sanctuaries (vv. 17–18).
⚠️ Why This Matters
“They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.”
— 1 John 2:19
When someone condemns the righteous, redefines holiness, and isolates themselves from the body of Christ, they are not restoring Christianity — they are replacing it. And that is not the posture of a prophet. It is the posture of rebellion.
Sources:
Joseph Smith’s First Vision – FAIR
Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith – MRM.org
Jesus Christ’s Posture Toward the Righteous
The Shepherd Who Affirms, Not Condemns
In contrast to Joseph Smith’s early claims, which broadly dismissed or condemned the spiritual integrity of all existing believers and churches, Jesus Christ consistently affirmed those who walked in obedience to God’s heart..
Rather than isolating Himself from the faithful, Jesus called them (Matthew 4:18–22), walked with them (Luke 8:1–3), and entrusted them with His mission (Matthew 28:18–20). His approach was not to invalidate the righteous, but to recognize and strengthen them (Luke 10:23–24; John 15:15).
📖 How Jesus Treated the Righteous
- John the Baptist: Jesus called him “the greatest among those born of women” (Matthew 11:11), not because John followed Him directly, but because he upheld truth and prepared the way.
- The faithful widow: Jesus praised her offering, saying she gave more than all the rich (Mark 12:43–44). He honored her heart, not her affiliation.
- The centurion: A Roman outsider, yet Jesus said, “I have not found such great faith in Israel” (Luke 7:9). He acknowledged faith wherever it appeared.
- The woman who anointed Him: Jesus said, “Wherever the gospel is preached… what she has done will be told in memory of her” (Mark 14:9). Her devotion was elevated, not dismissed.
🔥 The Contrast
- Joseph Smith’s revelations dismissed and condemned the righteous outside his movement.
Scripture, however, affirms that genuine faith is not confined to any single institution or movement. Jesus praised the Roman centurion’s faith (Luke 7:9), honored the widow’s offering (Mark 12:43–44), and declared, “Blessed are the pure in heart” (Matthew 5:8). Smith’s posture stands in theological contradiction to these affirmations. - Smith’s teachings created separation from the historic body of Christ.
But Jesus prayed for unity among all believers (John 17:20–23) and called His followers to maintain the unity of the Spirit (Ephesians 4:3–6). Smith’s posture introduced division where Christ called for oneness. - Smith claimed new authority through personal revelation.
Scripture teaches that Jesus fulfilled the law and the prophets (Matthew 5:17), and that God has spoken definitively through His Son (Hebrews 1:1–2). Smith’s claim to new revelation bypasses the sufficiency of Christ and the authority of Scripture.
🧠 Theological Implication
When Jesus said, “There is none good but one, that is, God” (Mark 10:18), He was indicating two foundational truths: first, that God alone is holy, and second, that there is only one true God. This wasn’t a sweeping condemnation of humanity — it was a recognition of divine perfection. And even within that framework, Jesus still affirmed the righteous. He said, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God” (Matthew 5:8). His posture was not rejection — it was invitation, affirmation, and grace.
Rather than elevating Himself by rejecting others, Jesus humbled Himself to lift others up — especially those already walking in faith and obedience.
If Joseph Smith claimed to restore Christianity, shouldn’t his posture have reflected Christ’s? Shouldn’t he have honored the faithful, affirmed the righteous, and built upon the truth already revealed?
Instead, the contrast is clear — and it raises a deeper question: Was this truly restoration — or was it spiritual replacement?
🔍 Joseph Smith vs. Jesus Christ
A Theological Contrast
🧠 1. Source of Authority
Jesus: Spoke with inherent divine authority — “You have heard… but I say to you…” (Matthew 5)
Joseph Smith: Claimed new revelations and authority through angelic visitations and visions (e.g., Moroni, First Vision)
📜 2. Scriptural Integrity
Jesus: Affirmed the Law and Prophets, fulfilled Scripture, and warned against altering God’s Word (Matthew 5:17–19)
Joseph Smith: Produced new scriptures (Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants) and revised the Bible (Joseph Smith Translation), introducing doctrines that diverge from biblical teaching.
✝️ 3. Nature of God
Jesus: Revealed God as eternal, spirit, and Father (John 4:24; John 17)
Joseph Smith: Taught that God was once a man and that humans can become gods — a doctrine foreign to biblical teaching
🕊️ 4. Salvation
Jesus: Salvation is by grace through faith in Him alone (John 3:16; Ephesians 2:8–9)
Joseph Smith: Added requirements like temple rituals, priesthood authority, and celestial marriage for full exaltation
🙌 5. Humility vs. Self-Exaltation
Jesus: Emptied Himself, served others, and submitted to the Father’s will (Philippians 2:5–8)
Joseph Smith: Made boastful statements, including the claim that he did more for salvation “save Jesus only” (Doctrine and Covenants 135:3) — a comparison that elevates his role beyond biblical precedent.
🧱 6. Foundation of the Church
Jesus: Built His church on the confession of faith — “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16–18)
Joseph Smith: Claimed to restore the only true church through personal revelation, dismissing all others as false (Joseph Smith—History 1:18–19)
🧠 7. Posture Toward the Righteous
Jesus: Affirmed the faithful, praised their obedience, and called them into unity (Matthew 5:8; John 17:20–23)
Joseph Smith: Condemned all existing believers and churches, claiming none were righteous outside his authority — a posture that contradicts Christ’s affirmation of the faithful (1832 & 1838 First Vision accounts).
Doctrinal Comparison Table
This table reveals a consistent pattern: where Jesus affirms grace, unity, and sufficiency, Joseph Smith introduces hierarchy, exclusivity, and additional requirements. The contrast is not minor — it’s foundational.
| Teaching of Christ Biblical Reference |
Joseph Smith’s Divergent Teaching LDS Source |
|---|---|
| God is One Mark 12:29; Isaiah 45:5 |
God was once a man; men can become gods King Follett Discourse; D&C 132:20 |
| Salvation by grace through faith John 3:16; Ephesians 2:8–9 |
Salvation requires temple ordinances, priesthood, and works Articles of Faith #3; D&C 76 |
| Jesus is eternally divine John 1:1–14; Hebrews 13:8 |
Jesus progressed to godhood, according to LDS teaching — a status others may also aspire to. Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 346 |
| No marriage in heaven Matthew 22:30 |
Eternal marriage is essential for exaltation D&C 132 |
| The gospel of Christ is sufficient for salvation Romans 1:16; 2 Timothy 3:15–17 |
Salvation requires additional doctrines and ordinances beyond the gospel D&C 124; D&C 132; Articles of Faith #3 |
| Worship God alone Matthew 4:10 |
Explicit veneration of Joseph Smith as prophet-king, often expressed in hymns and teachings. Joseph Smith is venerated in ways that Scripture reserves for Christ alone. History of the Church Vol. 6, p. 319; D&C 135:3 |
| The Holy Spirit is a person of the Trinity John 14:26; Acts 5:3–4 |
The Holy Ghost is a separate being, not co-equal Articles of Faith #1; LDS Bible Dictionary |
| God is spirit and eternal John 4:24; Psalm 90:2 |
God has a physical body and was once mortal D&C 130:22; King Follett Discourse |
| The Gospel is for all, equally Galatians 3:28; Acts 10:34–35 |
Priesthood was restricted by race until 1978 — a practice not found in the teachings of Christ, who established a spiritual priesthood open to all believers. Official Declaration 2 (1978); Journal of Discourses Vol. 10 |
| Jesus is the only mediator 1 Timothy 2:5; John 14:6 |
Joseph Smith claimed unique authority to reveal God’s will D&C 132:7; History of the Church Vol. 6 |
| Humility and servanthood Matthew 23:11–12 |
Joseph Smith claimed unparalleled greatness and authority History of the Church Vol. 6, p. 408 |
| Warning against false prophets Matthew 7:15–23 |
Claimed to restore the only true church through personal revelation Joseph Smith—History 1:18–19 |
| Christ’s sacrifice is sufficient Hebrews 10:10–14 |
Salvation requires temple rituals and eternal marriage D&C 124; D&C 131–132 |
This comparison reveals not just doctrinal divergence, but a redefinition of the gospel itself — one that replaces grace with systems, and Christ’s sufficiency with human authority
Conclusion: A Call to Discernment
The contrast between Jesus Christ and Joseph Smith is not a matter of nuance — it is a matter of foundation. Where Christ offers grace, unity, holiness, and wisdom, Joseph Smith introduces hierarchy, exclusivity, and spiritual redefinition.
The gospel of Jesus is sufficient, rooted in truth and transformation; the teachings of Smith replace that sufficiency with systems and self-exaltation.
This page is not merely a critique — it is a call to return to the true Shepherd, whose voice affirms the righteous, calls sinners to repentance, and leads His people in holiness and truth.