A Theological Analysis from the Traditional Christian Perspective
Introduction
The question of spiritual discernment has been a concern for the Christian church since its inception. From the apostolic era onward, believers have been exhorted to “test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.” (1 John 4:1). This injunction carries particular weight when examining the claims of individuals who assert prophetic authority and claim divine visitation. Joseph Smith Jr. (1805-1844), the founder of the Latter-day Saint movement, made extraordinary claims about angelic visitations, divine revelation, and prophetic calling that demand serious theological scrutiny.
This essay proposes to examine, from within the framework of historic, orthodox Christianity, whether a legitimate biblical and logical case can be constructed that Joseph Smith’s religious system originated, at least in part, from demonic influence rather than divine revelation. This investigation will proceed not from conjecture or mere opinion, but from the application of biblical criteria for discerning true from false prophets, an examination of Smith’s documented involvement with occult practices, and an analysis of the doctrinal content of his teachings when measured against the apostolic gospel.
The thesis of this paper is as follows: Applying the biblical tests for prophetic authenticity, examining the historical evidence of Smith’s involvement in folk magic and occult practices, and analyzing the theological content of his revelations against the apostolic standard, traditional Christianity possesses substantial grounds for concluding that Joseph Smith’s religious claims bear the marks of demonic deception rather than divine revelation.
The Biblical Framework: Understanding Demonic Deception
Before examining the specific case of Joseph Smith, it is essential to establish the biblical framework for understanding how demonic entities operate in matters of religious deception. Scripture provides extensive teaching on this subject that forms the foundation for theological discernment.
The Nature and Purpose of Demonic Activity. The Bible presents a consistent portrait of Satan and his demonic hosts as entities primarily engaged in deception. Revelation 12:9 identifies Satan as “that ancient serpent…who deceives the whole world.” This characterization reaches back to Genesis 3, where the serpent employed a subtle distortion of God’s word to lead humanity into rebellion. The devil’s modus operandi has remained consistent throughout biblical history: deception leading to destruction.
Ligonier Ministries: Satan in Disguise
Were the devil to come after us directly as a blatant promoter of wickedness, he would be easier to identify and resist. But since he so often attacks us under the guise of what is apparently good, we can find it difficult to see him sowing discord and causing a host of other problems before he has wreaked much damage on us and the church.
Jesus himself identified Satan as “a liar, and the father of lies” (John 8:44). This description is not incidental but definitional. Lying, deceiving, and counterfeiting truth represent the essential strategy of demonic warfare against humanity. The apostle Paul recognized this when he warned that “the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons.” (1 Timothy 4:1).
Satan as an Angel of Light. Perhaps no biblical text is more relevant to the present inquiry than 2 Corinthians 11:14-15, where Paul declares: “And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness.” This passage establishes a critical principle: demonic deception does not typically present itself in obviously evil forms. Rather, Satan’s most effective strategy is to appear benevolent, holy, and even divine.
The context of this passage is instructive. Paul was addressing the problem of false apostles who had infiltrated the Corinthian church, “deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ” (2 Corinthians 11:13). These individuals appeared outwardly righteous and claimed spiritual authority, yet they preached “another Jesus” and “a different gospel.”(2 Corinthians 11:4). Paul’s response was not to examine their sincerity or the apparent spiritual nature of their experiences, but to measure their message against the apostolic standard.
Demonic Influence on Thought and Revelation. Scripture provides examples of demonic entities influencing human thought and claiming to provide revelation. John 13:2 states that “the devil had already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray Him.” This text demonstrates that demonic influence can operate through the implantation of thoughts and intentions that the recipient may not recognize as having an external, malevolent source. The Greek verb ballō (“to throw” or “to put”) suggests an insertion from outside—the devil placed this intention into Judas’s heart. Yet there is no indication that Judas experienced this as an alien intrusion or recognized it as a satanic suggestion. To Judas, these thoughts likely felt like his own reasoning, his own conclusions, perhaps even his own righteous indignation at perceived waste (John 12:4-614 But Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples (he who was about to betray him), said, 5 “Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor?” 6 He said this, not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief, and having charge of the moneybag he used to help himself to what was put into it.) or his own disillusionment with a Messiah who spoke of death rather than political liberation. The terrifying implication is that Judas may have walked toward the chief priests with a sense of moral clarity, convinced he was acting reasonably—perhaps even providentially—while in reality executing a scheme planted in his mind by the father of lies.
This is the subtlety of demonic deception: it does not typically announce itself. The demonically-influenced individual does not hear a sinister voice saying, “I am Satan, and I command you to do evil.” Rather, the thoughts arrive dressed in the familiar clothing of one’s own reasoning, one’s own grievances, one’s own spiritual intuitions. The person may feel they are following their conscience, pursuing justice, or even serving God. Jesus warned of a day when people would kill believers “thinking they are offering service to God” (John 16:2). Paul persecuted the church “in good conscience” (Acts 23:12And looking intently at the council, Paul said, “Brothers, I have lived my life before God in all good conscience up to this day.”; cf. 1 Timothy 1:133though formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received mercy because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief,). Sincerity offers no immunity against deception—indeed, the most effective deception is that which co-opts the victim’s own sense of sincerity and moral purpose. This has profound implications for evaluating prophetic claims: a prophet may genuinely believe he is receiving divine revelation while actually being fed thoughts and visions from a malevolent spiritual source masquerading as an angel of light.
Furthermore, demonic spirits are capable of counterfeiting divine gifts. Acts 16:16-18416 As we were going to the place of prayer, we were met by a slave girl who had a spirit of divination and brought her owners much gain by fortune-telling. 17 She followed Paul and us, crying out, “These men are servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to you the way of salvation.” 18 And this she kept doing for many days. Paul, having become greatly annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And it came out that very hour. records the case of a slave girl “who had a spirit of divination” (Greek: pneuma pythōna, a “Python spirit“). This spirit enabled her to tell fortunes and make predictions. Significantly, the content of her proclamations was factually accurate—she correctly identified Paul and his companions as “servants of the Most High God, who are proclaiming to you the way of salvation.” (v. 17). Yet Paul discerned the demonic source and commanded the spirit to depart. This account demonstrates that supernatural knowledge and even accurate statements do not validate the divine origin of a spiritual manifestation.
Historical Examples of Demonic Influence in Religious Movements
Throughout church history, Christian theologians have recognized the reality of demonic influence operating through religious movements and their founders. The early church fathers confronted various Gnostic systems that claimed special revelation while fundamentally distorting the Christian gospel. Irenaeus, Tertullian, and others identified these movements as demonically inspired counterfeits.
The pattern identified by the church fathers remains relevant: movements that claim divine authority while contradicting apostolic teaching, that introduce novel doctrines about the nature of God and Christ, and that derive from occult or esoteric sources bear the hallmarks of demonic deception. Augustine warned extensively about demonic illusions and the capacity of evil spirits to present themselves in ways that appear holy and beneficial. He wrote that “nothing but the great mercy of God can save a man from mistaking bad demons for good angels and false friends for true ones.”
The Reformation era saw renewed attention to spiritual discernment. The Reformers, while emphasizing sola scriptura, recognized that Scripture itself warned of false prophets and lying spirits. They applied biblical criteria rigorously to claims of revelation and religious authority, measuring all things against the apostolic witness preserved in the biblical text.
The Reformers, like John Calvin, spoke extensively against false prophets and lying spirits, viewing them as spiritual deceivers leading people to idolatry and heresy, contrasting them with true preachers who point to Christ, often citing biblical warnings from Jesus (Matthew 7:155Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.) and the apostles (1 John 4:16Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.) to expose those who distort doctrine for gain, particularly targeting practices like relic worship and unbiblical traditions prevalent in the medieval Catholic Church, calling for a return to Scripture as the ultimate authority.
Key Reformers and Their Views:
John Calvin: Highlighted how false prophets, like those claiming relics (e.g., the True Cross), held power, deceived people, and led to idolatry, emphasizing the need to discern spirits and trust God’s revealed Word over human traditions.
Martin Luther: Condemned false prophets who preached salvation by works or indulgences, contrasting them with the pure gospel of justification by faith, a core tenet of the Reformation.
Biblical Tests for Prophetic Authenticity
Scripture provides clear criteria for evaluating prophetic claims. These tests were given precisely because God knew that false prophets would arise claiming divine authority. The application of these criteria to Joseph Smith’s claims provides substantial evidence for concluding that his prophetic ministry did not originate from the God of the Bible.
The Deuteronomic Test: Prophetic Accuracy. Deuteronomy 18:20-22 establishes a foundational test for prophetic validity: “But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die. And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?’—when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously.”
This test has two components: first, a true prophet must speak only what God has commanded; second, predictive prophecies must be fulfilled. Joseph Smith made numerous specific predictions that demonstrably failed to materialize. Perhaps most notable is the prophecy recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 84:1-5, 31, given on September 22-23, 1832, which declared that a temple would be built in Independence, Missouri, in “this generation.” Smith stated: “The city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation.” The generation of Smith’s contemporaries has long since passed, and no such temple has been built on that site. The Latter-day Saints were driven from Missouri, and the temple lot is now owned by a different religious group.
Additionally, Smith prophesied in 1843 that “unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers…in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left.” The United States government did not provide redress, yet the nation continues to exist over 180 years later.
The Deuteronomic Test: Theological Fidelity. Deuteronomy 13:1-5 provides an additional criterion that addresses the theological content of prophetic teaching: “If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the LORD your God is testing you, to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.”
This passage establishes that even if prophetic signs appear to be fulfilled, the ultimate test is whether the prophet leads people toward or away from the true God. A prophet who teaches the worship of “other gods”—that is, gods other than the God revealed in Scripture—stands condemned regardless of any accompanying signs or wonders.
The Galatians Test: Gospel Fidelity. The apostle Paul issued a severe warning in Galatians 1:8-9: “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.” This test is remarkable for its comprehensiveness—it applies even to apostles and to angels from heaven. The criterion is not the apparent source of the message but its conformity to the apostolic gospel.
The relevance of this test to Joseph Smith’s claims cannot be overstated. Smith claimed that an angel (Moroni) delivered to him golden plates containing the Book of Mormon and that he received additional revelations from heavenly messengers. According to Paul’s criterion, the validity of these claims depends not on the apparent angelic source but on whether the resulting message conforms to the apostolic gospel. As will be demonstrated below, the theological content of Smith’s revelations represents a fundamental departure from apostolic Christianity.
Joseph Smith’s Involvement in Folk Magic and Occult Practices
One of the most significant factors in evaluating Joseph Smith’s prophetic claims is the extensive historical evidence documenting his involvement in folk magic and occult practices both before and during his prophetic career. This evidence is now acknowledged even by LDS historians and the institutional Church, though interpretations of its significance vary. Of particular theological importance is the mechanism by which Smith claimed to receive his scriptures—not through the Holy Spirit’s direct communication as with biblical prophets, but through divination instruments associated with his earlier occult practices.
Seer Stones and “Glass-Looking.” Joseph Smith owned multiple “seer stones,” which he used for treasure-seeking and divination. His favored stone, chocolate-colored and about the size of an egg, was found while digging a well around 1822. Smith used this stone by placing it in a hat and burying his face in the hat to exclude light, whereupon he claimed to receive visions of hidden treasures and other knowledge. The LDS Church released photographs of this stone in 2015 as part of the Joseph Smith Papers Project.
This practice, known as “glass-looking” or “peep-stoning,” was a form of divination widely recognized as occult in nature. In 1826, Smith was brought before a court in South Bainbridge, New York, charged as “a disorderly person” for his activities as a “glass-looker”—one who “pretending to have skill in physiognomy, palmistry, or like crafty science, or pretending to tell fortunes, or to discover where lost goods may be found.” Court records document that Smith testified he had used a stone that enabled him to see “where hidden treasures in the bowels of the earth were.”
The Mechanism of Translation: Divination, Not the Holy Spirit. A critical distinction must be drawn here that bears directly on the theological evaluation of Smith’s claims. Joseph Smith did not claim that the Holy Spirit directly revealed the Book of Mormon text to him, as with biblical prophets who received “Thus saith the LORD.” Instead, he employed a divination instrument—the same seer stone used for treasure-seeking—as the mechanism of translation.
Multiple witnesses, including Emma Smith (Joseph’s wife) and David Whitmer (one of the Three Witnesses), testified that Smith translated the Book of Mormon by placing his seer stone in a hat, pressing his face into the hat to exclude light, and reading aloud the English words that appeared on the stone. David Whitmer described the process: “Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing.”
The standard LDS formulation that Smith translated “by the gift and power of God” is deliberately vague. LDS sources do indicate that Smith needed to be “worthy” and “guided by the Spirit” to translate—meaning a spiritual state was necessary—but the actual mechanism was the divination stone, not direct revelation from the Holy Spirit. As one LDS source notes, Smith “learned that the divine gift was with him only when he was worthy to be guided by the Spirit,” but the Spirit enabled him to use the stone; the stone itself was the instrument through which text appeared.
This distinction is theologically critical. Biblical prophets did not require divination instruments to receive God’s word. Moses received the Law directly from God. Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the prophets received direct communication: “The word of the LORD came to me.” The New Testament apostles spoke and wrote “as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21). Nowhere in Scripture does a true prophet receive divine revelation by gazing into an enchanted stone.
The Continuity Between Occult Practice and “Prophetic” Activity. The same brown seer stone that Smith used for treasure-seeking and divination—the very practice for which he was tried in 1826—became the primary instrument for “translating” the Book of Mormon. Emma Smith confirmed this continuity, distinguishing between the “interpreters” (spectacles supposedly found with the plates) used for the lost 116 pages and the seer stone used thereafter: “The first that my husband translated, was translated by the use of the Urim, and Thummim, and that was the part that Martin Harris lost, after that he used a small stone, not exactly, black, but was rather a dark color.”
This continuity is devastating to any claim of divine origin. The instrument that enabled Smith to (falsely) claim he could locate buried treasure became the instrument through which he produced what he claimed was divine scripture. If the source of power in the first use was not God—and the failure to locate any treasure demonstrates it was not—what grounds exist for believing the source changed when the same instrument was applied to a different purpose?
Treasure Digging and Associated Practices. The Smith family was extensively involved in treasure-seeking expeditions guided by folk magic beliefs. These activities included drawing magic circles and performing rituals believed necessary to appease the spirit guardians of buried treasure. Contemporary accounts describe the Smiths as believing that treasures were guarded by spirits that could cause them to slip away unless proper procedures were followed.
The family possessed various items associated with folk magic traditions, including a dagger inscribed with astrological symbols (the “Mars dagger”) and parchments containing symbols copied from works such as Francis Barrett’s “The Magus” (1801), a compendium of occult knowledge including ceremonial magic, astrology, and the Kabbalah. The family also possessed a Jupiter talisman, an astrological charm believed to bring favor, wealth, and success to those born under Jupiter’s influence—Joseph Smith was born under the zodiacal sign associated with Jupiter.
Documentation for Smith Family Treasure Digging, Magic Circles, and Spirit Guardians:
1. Lucy Mack Smith’s Own Statement (Primary Source)
From Lucy Mack Smith’s autobiography/memoir (first draft, 1845):
Now I shall change my theme for the present. But let not my reader suppose that, because I shall pursue another topic for a season, that we stopped our labor and went at trying to win the faculty of Abrac, drawing Magic circles or sooth saying to the neglect of all kinds of business. We never during our lives suffered one important interest to swallow up every other obligation. But, whilst we worked with our hands, we endeavored to remember the service of, and the welfare of our souls.
Richard Bushman (LDS historian) interprets this in Rough Stone Rolling: “Lucy’s point was that the Smiths were not lazy–they had not stopped their labor to practice magic–but she showed her knowledge of formulas and rituals and associated them with ‘the welfare of our souls.’ Magic and religion melded in the Smith family culture.” Joseph Smith Foundation
2. Magic Circles and Treasure Guardian Beliefs
LDS scholar Mark Ashurst-McGee (Maxwell Institute, 2006) describes the treasure-seeking practices:
Gathering at the designated spot, the treasure seekers staked out magical circles around the treasure. They used Bible passages and hymns, prayers and incantations, ritual swords and other magical items, or even propitiatory animal sacrifices to appease or fend off preternatural guardians of the treasure. Excavation usually commenced under a rule of silence. Should someone carelessly mutter or curse, the treasure guardian could penetrate the circle or carry the treasure away through the earth. Globalevangelism
3. Slippery Treasure and Guardian Spirits
According to Pomeroy Tucker’s account (from participants “yet living”), an early treasure dig involving Joseph Jr. featured “Joseph Jr. locating the spot by aid of a seer stone, use of a magic enchantment to hold the treasure to the spot, ordering silence, a two-hour dig, a word carelessly spoken, and the seer’s revelation that the treasure had slipped away.” Dialogue Journal
In Joseph Smith’s day, it was believed that spirits who had charge over buried treasure could cause the treasure to move from here to there, sink deeper into the earth, or disappear. Globalevangelism
4. The Mars Dagger for Drawing Magic Circles
Hyrum Smith inherited and passed down several relics to his descendants. These include a ‘Mars Dagger,’ Mars being the ruling planet of Joseph Smith Sr.’s birth year. Inscribed on one side of the dagger is the astrological symbol for Mars, the occult seal of Mars, and ‘Adonay,’ a Hebrew word for ‘God.’ On the blade of the dagger is the zodiacal sign of Scorpio. Specially consecrated daggers or swords were often prescribed when drawing magic circles. Wikipedia
Joseph Smith Sr. possessed a pointed dagger inscribed with astrological and occult symbols, which his family used to etch circles around digging sites to bind the enchantment or protect the diggers. Mormon Stories
5. William Stafford and Peter Ingersoll Affidavits (1833)
William Stafford, who lived about a mile and a half south of the Smiths, “was invited by Joseph Sr. to participate in a treasure dig on Smith property.” Dialogue Journal
Peter Ingersoll, who first met the Smiths in 1822, saw Joseph Sr. use both a mineral rod and a seer stone to locate buried treasure on his own property. Dialogue Journal
6. Luman Walters Connection
In 1822 and 1823, Luman Walters served as a seer for a treasure dig on the property of Abner Cole in Palmyra. Alvin Smith, Joseph Smith, and their father reportedly participated in this dig. Walters possessed a magical book and a seer stone, which he used to locate buried treasure. Abner Cole recalled that ‘Walters the Magician’ had drawn magic circles and ‘sacrificed a Cock for the purpose of propitiating the prince of spirits’ during the treasure dig. Wikipedia
A Note on Animal Sacrifice Claims. Several retrospective accounts from neighbors allege that animal sacrifice was practiced during Smith-associated treasure digs. William Stafford’s 1833 affidavit (published in E.D. Howe’s Mormonism Unvailed, 1834) claimed the Smiths requested a black sheep for sacrifice. Emily M. Austin’s 1882 memoir reported being told that a dog was sacrificed on Joseph Knight’s farm, and Justice Joel Noble wrote in 1842 of a dog sacrifice during treasure operations. However, these accounts require careful evaluation: they are retrospective (written years or decades after the alleged events), largely secondhand (Austin was “told” about events she did not witness; Stafford was not present at the dig he described), and contested by LDS scholars as unreliable hearsay. While such practices were reportedly common among treasure diggers of that era, the direct evidence connecting Smith personally to animal sacrifice is less robust than the thoroughly documented evidence of his seer stone use and glass-looking activities. Scholarly honesty requires acknowledging this distinction in evidentiary strength.
Biblical Evaluation of These Practices. The practices in which Joseph Smith engaged are explicitly condemned in Scripture. Deuteronomy 18:10-12 provides a comprehensive prohibition: “There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer or a charmer or a medium or a necromancer or one who inquires of the dead, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD.”
The term “divination” in this passage translates the Hebrew qesem, which refers to the practice of seeking hidden knowledge through supernatural means other than God’s ordained channels. “Glass-looking” with seer stones—scrying—falls squarely within this category. The stone-in-hat method used to produce the Book of Mormon is not materially different from the crystal ball gazing, mirror scrying, or other forms of lithomancy (divination by stones) practiced across occult traditions throughout history. The passage also condemns those who “interpret omens”—practices associated with the astrological beliefs documented in Smith’s environment.
LDS members may find this claim incredible, yet the full body of evidence on Joseph Smith’s extensive occult connections—from seer stones and treasure seeking to folk magic practices—warrants a serious inquiry. The question arises: If God condemned divination and such “abominations” in Scripture (Deuteronomy 18:10-12710 There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer 11 or a charmer or a medium or a necromancer or one who inquires of the dead, 12 for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord. And because of these abominations, the Lord your God is driving them out before you.), why select someone immersed in them to restore His church? Even more pointedly, why transform the very seer stone-in-hat method Smith used for condemned treasure hunting into the tool for dictating divine scripture like the Book of Mormon? From biblical theology, this seamless continuity between his occult methods and prophetic claims points to a consistent spiritual source—one that Scripture deems incompatible with God.
Theological Analysis: Another Jesus, Another Gospel
The apostle Paul warned the Corinthians against receiving “a different gospel” about “another Jesus” from “a different spirit” (2 Corinthians 11:48For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough.). This warning provides the framework for evaluating the theological content of Joseph Smith’s teachings. When examined against the apostolic standard, LDS theology reveals fundamental departures that place it outside the boundaries of historic Christianity.
The Nature of God: Polytheism vs. Monotheism. Historic Christianity, following the biblical witness, affirms strict monotheism: “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4). The God of the Bible is eternal, self-existent, incorporeal, omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent. He is the Creator of all things, and beside Him there is no other God (Isaiah 43:109“You are my witnesses,” declares the Lord, “and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.; 44:6, 8106 Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god. 8 Fear not, nor be afraid; have I not told you from of old and declared it? And you are my witnesses! Is there a God besides me? There is no Rock; I know not any.).
Joseph Smith taught a radically different view. In his famous King Follett Discourse (1844), he declared: “I will teach on the plurality of Gods…God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!” Smith taught that the God whom Mormons worship was once a mortal man who progressed to godhood, and that faithful Mormons may follow the same path. Lorenzo Snow summarized this doctrine: “As man is now, God once was; as God is now, man may be.”
Furthermore, LDS teaching affirms the existence of multiple gods. The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are understood not as one God in three persons (the historic Christian doctrine of the Trinity) but as three separate gods unified in purpose. Doctrine and Covenants 130:22 states: “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit.” Brigham Young stated, “How many Gods there are, I do not know. But there never was a time when there were not Gods and worlds.”
This teaching constitutes polytheism—the belief in multiple gods. It directly contradicts the biblical declarations: “I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God” (Isaiah 44:6); “Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me” (Isaiah 43:10). By the criterion of Deuteronomy 13, a prophet who leads people to worship “other gods” stands condemned, regardless of any signs or wonders.
The Person of Christ. The Christ proclaimed by Joseph Smith differs fundamentally from the Christ of apostolic Christianity. In LDS theology, Jesus is the “firstborn” spirit child of Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother, making Him the literal spirit brother of all humanity—including Lucifer. Jesus attained His divine status through progression, and His divinity is qualitatively the same as that which humans may achieve.
By contrast, biblical Christianity affirms that Jesus Christ is the eternal, uncreated Second Person of the Trinity, “true God from true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father” (Nicene Creed). He is the Creator of all things, including all spiritual beings (Colossians 1:1611For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.; John 1:312All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.). He did not attain divinity but possesses it eternally by nature. The difference is not one of emphasis but of essential identity: the Mormon Jesus and the biblical Jesus are different beings.
The Gospel of Salvation. The apostolic gospel declares that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone (Ephesians 2:8-9138 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.; Romans 3:21-261421 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.). Believers are justified—declared righteous before God—solely based on Christ’s atoning work, received through faith.
LDS theology presents a fundamentally different soteriology. According to Mormon apostle Bruce McConkie, the gospel is “the plan of salvation [that] embraces all of the laws, principles, doctrines, rites, ordinances, acts, powers, authorities, and keys necessary to save and exalt men.” This includes faith, repentance, baptism by LDS priesthood authority, laying on of hands, temple ordinances, tithing, observance of the Word of Wisdom, temple marriage, and other requirements. The ultimate goal—celestial exaltation and godhood—is achieved through this comprehensive system of works and ordinances.
This represents precisely the kind of “different gospel” against which Paul pronounced anathema. It adds to the finished work of Christ a system of human works and religious observances as necessary for salvation. It constitutes a return to the very error that Paul combated in Galatians.
The Rhetorical Question: If Not from Smith, Then from Whom?
Joseph Smith’s prophetic claims rest substantially on his accounts of angelic visitations—first the appearance of the Father and the Son in 1820 (the First Vision), then the visits of the angel Moroni beginning in 1823, and subsequently other heavenly messengers. The principle of 1 John 4:1-3 applies directly: “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.”
Paul’s warning in Galatians 1:8 is directly relevant: “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.” The criterion for evaluating angelic visitations is not the subjective experience of the recipient but the theological content of the message. An angel who brings a different gospel—regardless of how glorious the appearance or how sincere the recipient—is to be rejected.
The angel who visited Joseph Smith delivered a message that contradicts the apostolic gospel at its most fundamental points. The result was a religious system that teaches a different God, a different Christ, and a different way of salvation. By the Pauline criterion, the source of these visitations cannot have been a messenger from the God of the Bible.
Ironically, the LDS Church’s own apologetic arguments inadvertently strengthen this conclusion. For generations, Mormon leaders and apologists have emphasized Joseph Smith’s lack of formal education as evidence that the Book of Mormon could not have been a product of his own intellect. Emma Smith testified that her husband “could neither write nor dictate a coherent and well-worded letter, let alone dictate a book like the Book of Mormon.” The Book of Mormon’s title page itself declares it was produced “by the gift and power of God.” LDS apostle Neal A. Maxwell stated that Joseph Smith was “not a learned man” and lacked the intellectual capacity to produce such a work on his own. Elder Jeffrey R. Holland has similarly argued that an uneducated farm boy could not have fabricated so complex a narrative.
If we accept this premise—and there is considerable evidence that Smith had limited formal schooling—then the question becomes not whether Smith had supernatural assistance, but what kind of supernatural assistance he received. The LDS argument assumes that because the work exceeds Smith’s natural capacity, it must be divine. But this reasoning ignores the third possibility: demonic assistance. Scripture is clear that Satan and his demons possess intelligence far exceeding that of any human (Ezekiel 28:1215Son of man, raise a lamentation over the king of Tyre, and say to him, Thus says the Lord God: You were the signet of perfection,[a] full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.; James 2:1916You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!), are capable of communicating with and through human beings (Acts 16:16-181716 As we were going to the place of prayer, we were met by a slave girl who had a spirit of divination and brought her owners much gain by fortune-telling. 17 She followed Paul and us, crying out, “These men are servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to you the way of salvation.” 18 And this she kept doing for many days. Paul, having become greatly annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And it came out that very hour.; 1 Kings 22:21-231821 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, saying, ‘I will entice him.’ 22 And the Lord said to him, ‘By what means?’ And he said, ‘I will go out, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And he said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do so.’ 23 Now therefore behold, the Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the Lord has declared disaster for you.”), and are devoted to religious deception (2 Corinthians 11:14-151914 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. 15 So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.; 1 Timothy 4:120Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons,). If Joseph Smith truly lacked the intellectual capacity to produce the Book of Mormon, and if the theological content of that book establishes the foundation for a religious system that contradicts the apostolic gospel at every essential point, then the LDS Church’s own argument points not toward divine inspiration but toward the very demonic influence we have been examining. The unlearned prophet becomes, in this light, not evidence of God’s hand but of Satan’s—a vessel through whom a deceiving spirit could produce an elaborate counterfeit scripture precisely because the man himself could not have done so.
Given that 2 Corinthians 11:14 establishes Satan’s capacity to appear “as an angel of light,” and given that the theological content of the messages delivered to Joseph Smith contradicts the biblical gospel, the traditional Christian conclusion is that these visitations were demonic counterfeits designed to deceive. This conclusion rests not on speculation about spiritual experiences but on the application of biblical criteria to verifiable theological content.
The Book of Mormon itself, while containing less explicitly heterodox theology than Smith’s later works, nonetheless serves as the foundation for a religious system that ultimately teaches doctrines contrary to biblical Christianity. It validates Joseph Smith as a prophet, establishes the necessity of the LDS church and its ordinances, and creates the framework within which his later, more explicitly polytheistic teachings could be received. If a supernatural source aided in its production, and if that source led to a religious system contradicting the biblical gospel, then by biblical criteria, that source was demonic.
The Perpetuation of Sincere Error
How do we account for the continuation of a demonically-inspired religious system through generations of intelligent, seemingly sincere leaders? Several factors merit consideration.
First, Scripture itself warns that demonic deception is effective precisely because it does not appear demonic—Satan’s servants “masquerade as servants of righteousness” (2 Corinthians 11:1521So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.), and many will sincerely cry “Lord, Lord” while practicing lawlessness (Matthew 7:21-232221 Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’). Sincerity is no guarantee of truth; one can be sincerely deceived.
Second, once a religious system is established, subsequent generations inherit it as normative—they are born into it, raised within its epistemological framework, and taught to interpret spiritual experiences through its lens. The successor to Joseph Smith does not encounter a seer stone and angel; he encounters an established institution, a community of believers, a body of scripture already accepted as canonical, and social/familial pressure to conform.
Third, the LDS epistemological method—praying for a “burning in the bosom” to confirm truth—is particularly susceptible to confirmation bias and the misattribution of emotional experiences to divine witness. A young man raised to believe Mormonism is true, who prays expecting confirmation and experiences positive emotions while reading the Book of Mormon, naturally interprets this as the Holy Spirit’s witness—yet the same method would “confirm” countless contradictory religions to their adherents.
Fourth, we must acknowledge that demonic strategy is patient and generational; having established a counterfeit gospel through one man, the enemy need not repeat spectacular manifestations—the institution perpetuates itself through ordinary human mechanisms of tradition, family loyalty, institutional authority, and the genuine moral community that exists among LDS members.
Finally, and most soberly, we must recognize that even brilliant, educated minds are not immune to spiritual deception—intelligence offers no protection against error when the fundamental premises are flawed, and the epistemological method is compromised. The history of human thought is littered with intelligent people defending false systems with great sophistication.
Consider the brilliant Saul of Tarsus, a student of the renowned Gamaliel, trained in the finest traditions of Pharisaic Judaism, who “advanced in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers” (Galatians 1:14). Yet this intellectual giant persecuted the church of God “in good conscience” (Acts 23:123And looking intently at the council, Paul said, “Brothers, I have lived my life before God in all good conscience up to this day.), genuinely believing he was serving God while actively opposing the Messiah. Only supernatural intervention on the Damascus road opened his eyes to the deception under which he had labored.
In the second century, Marcion of Sinope was a wealthy shipowner and by all accounts an intelligent, capable man who developed an elaborate theological system that distinguished between the God of the Old Testament and the Father of Jesus Christ. His movement attracted a significant following and produced its own canon of Scripture, demonstrating that intellectual sophistication can construct remarkably coherent false systems.
In more recent history, we might observe Sir Isaac Newton—perhaps the greatest scientific mind in human history, who formulated the laws of motion and universal gravitation—secretly held anti-Trinitarian views and spent more time studying apocalyptic prophecy and alchemy than physics. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the creator of the hyper-rational Sherlock Holmes, devoted the latter part of his life to promoting spiritualism and defending the existence of fairies, even after the Cottingley Fairies photographs were widely suspected to be fraudulent. Antony Flew, for decades the world’s most prominent philosophical atheist whose works shaped academic discourse on the existence of God, dramatically changed his position late in life—demonstrating that even the most committed intellectual positions are not immune to revision, though in Flew’s case the revision was toward theism rather than away from it.
The twentieth century provides sobering examples of brilliant intellectuals embracing monstrous ideologies. Martin Heidegger, widely considered one of the most important philosophers of the twentieth century, joined the Nazi Party in 1933 and never fully repudiated his involvement, remaining a member until the end of World War II.
The point is not to equate all these errors or to suggest moral equivalence between heterodox theology and murderous ideology. Rather, it is to demonstrate that intellectual brilliance provides no immunity against deception, whether that deception be philosophical, political, or spiritual. If Newton could pursue alchemy, if Doyle could believe in fairies, if Heidegger could embrace Nazism, if Saul could persecute the church in good conscience, then certainly intelligent, educated men can sincerely propagate a religious system whose foundations rest on demonic deception. The LDS Church has produced capable scholars, articulate defenders, and sincere believers—but sincerity and intelligence have never been the biblical criteria for discerning truth from error. The question is not whether the advocates are smart or sincere, but whether the message conforms to the apostolic gospel.
“But the Book of Mormon is full of references to Jesus!”
The numerical claim (roughly one Christ-reference every 1.7 verses) is based on LDS-friendly counting and can be challenged methodologically, but even if you grant the statistic, it does nothing to prove divine origin or to rule out satanic deception.
About the 1.7-verse statistic
-
The figure comes from LDS-affiliated studies (e.g., Susan Easton Black; later Hilton & Sinclair), counting names and titles of Christ through the Book of Mormon, arriving at 3,925 references, or about once every 1.7 verses.
-
Later LDS work inflates this by including pronouns and indirect references, claiming 7,452 “references,” which obviously depends on subjective coding rules (e.g., when a “he” counts as Christ).
-
Much of the number comes from generic titles like “God,” “Lord,” or “Lord God,” which are then retroactively identified as Christ, not from explicit “Jesus Christ” references.
So even at the level of raw data, a critic can (a) question who did the counting, (b) what counts as a “reference,” and (c) whether generic “God/Lord” should be tallied as distinct Christological affirmations.
Why “lots of Jesus” does not prove truth
Biblically, false teaching can freely use Jesus-language, gospel-language, and Scripture, and still be satanic.
-
Paul warns that people will “proclaim another Jesus,” bring a “different spirit,” and preach a “different gospel,” and that this deception is satanic in character (2 Corinthians 11:3–4, 13–15). The whole point is that the counterfeit uses the right vocabulary.
-
Satan himself quotes Scripture to Jesus in the temptation narrative, but he twists and misapplies it (Matthew 4:5–7). The problem is not the words used but the intent and distortion.
-
Many non-Christian or heretical groups are heavily Jesus-saturated in language (prosperity preachers, certain cults, etc.), yet orthodox Christians regard their message as a distortion empowered by the enemy; “Jesus per verse” is not the test of spirits.
So the major logical flaw: “X talks a lot about Jesus, therefore it cannot be satanic” directly contradicts the New Testament’s explicit warning that Satan’s strategy is to package deception in Jesus-language and apparent righteousness.
Rebuttal of the argument
We grant the count for the sake of argument and still dismantle the conclusion:
-
We Concede: “Yes, by your own in-house method, you say the Book of Mormon refers to Christ about once every 1.7 verses.”
-
The Challenge: “But Scripture explicitly tells us that Satan’s servants ‘disguise themselves as servants of righteousness’ and that people can preach ‘another Jesus’ and a ‘different gospel.’ Therefore, Jesus-saturated language is fully compatible with satanic deception.”
-
The real issue: “The question is not how often the name is used, but whether the Jesus, gospel, and doctrine taught there match the apostolic witness already given in the Bible.”
In other words, even if the 1.7 statistic is taken at face value, it is a non sequitur. It neither proves divine inspiration nor excludes satanic origin; biblically, high-frequency “Jesus talk” is exactly what you would expect from a sophisticated counterfeit.
Conclusion
The thesis of this paper has been that traditional Christianity possesses substantial biblical and logical grounds for concluding that Joseph Smith’s religious claims bear the marks of demonic deception rather than divine revelation. This conclusion rests on the convergence of multiple lines of evidence:
First, the biblical framework establishes that demonic entities engage in religious deception, that Satan can appear as an angel of light, that demons can influence human thought and counterfeit divine gifts, and that the proper test of spiritual phenomena is theological content rather than subjective experience.
Second, applying the biblical tests for prophetic authenticity, Joseph Smith fails the criteria of Deuteronomy 18 (prophetic accuracy and speaking only what God commands), Deuteronomy 13 (not leading people after other gods), and Galatians 1:6-9246 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. (conformity to the apostolic gospel).
Third, the historical evidence of Smith’s extensive involvement in folk magic and occult practices places him in direct violation of Deuteronomy 18:10-12. The continuity between his occult divination methods and his prophetic activities suggests a continuity of spiritual source.
Fourth, the theological content of Smith’s teachings—a different God (polytheism), a different Christ (a created being who progressed to godhood), and a different gospel (salvation through works and ordinances)—constitutes precisely the “different gospel” against which Paul pronounced anathema.
Fifth, the claimed angelic source of these revelations, when measured against Paul’s criterion in Galatians 1:8, must be rejected as deceptive, since the message contradicts the apostolic gospel.
This conclusion is not offered in a spirit of hostility toward Latter-day Saints as individuals, many of whom are sincere, moral people seeking to serve God as they understand Him. Rather, it is offered as a serious theological assessment, grounded in Scripture and the historic Christian tradition, of the origins of the religious system Joseph Smith founded. The Bible itself commands such discernment: “Test everything; hold fast what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21).
The stakes of this question are eternal. If Joseph Smith was indeed a prophet of God, then his message should be embraced. But if, as the evidence suggests, his religious system originated from a deceiving spirit masquerading as an angel of light, then millions of sincere people have been led away from the true gospel of Jesus Christ. Love for truth and love for our LDS neighbors compels the honest examination of these questions, even when the conclusions are difficult.
The invitation of the biblical gospel remains: salvation through faith in Jesus Christ—the eternal Son of God, second Person of the Trinity, who died for our sins and rose again—received by grace through faith, apart from works. This is the gospel delivered once for all to the saints (Jude 3), the gospel that neither human beings nor angels from heaven have authority to alter. May all who seek truth find it in Jesus Christ, revealed in Holy Scripture.
Note on Sources: This analysis draws upon biblical texts (cited throughout), historical documentation of Joseph Smith’s involvement in folk magic as researched by D. Michael Quinn and others, official LDS scripture (Doctrine and Covenants, Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price), statements from LDS leaders (Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Bruce R. McConkie, Lorenzo Snow), the Joseph Smith Papers Project, and analysis from Christian apologetic ministries specializing in Mormon studies. Where claims rest on contested or retrospective sources (such as neighbor testimonies about animal sacrifice), this has been noted in the text.