Is Joseph Smith a prophet like Mohammed?

[IgnatianPhilo]

In some respects yes and in other respects no. Muhammad’s God was apparently beyond all comprehension. Joseph Smith’s God was like us a fleshly creature who was once a man. Joseph and Muhammad did have multiple wives, although I don’t think Muhammad ever engaged in Polyandry. Both revelations seem to have behind them the belief that the previous religion revealed by God had been totally corrupted so as to require the need to establish a New People of God. I think there is another difference in how followers of the prospective prophets regard these men. Muslims utterly devote themselves to Muhammad and emulating all that he did. LDS on the other hand are more able to dismiss certain teachings and practices of their prophet (like Polygamy, polyandry and the King Follet discourse).

 

[HelenRose]

Back to the original question.

This is a loaded question. A prophet like Mohammed?

Neither are prophets of God.

 

[Padres1969]

Sounds like the theology of Shia regarding their Ayatollahs

Not quite. As I understand it the Shia Ayatollah’s are essentially experts in one or more area of Islamic studies who are considered “signs from God” who act as judges and interpreters of the faith, but they’re not quite prophets.

For the LDS, the President of the largest churches, particularly the LDS Church itself, acts as a modern day living prophet, seer, and revelator of God’s truth not unlike the OT notion of prophets. And that they receive revelation from God on behalf of the entire church.

 

[Techno2000]

I guess my objection is: Terms like “False Prophets” come with enormous baggage. They are words that push buttons, cause arguments, are found insulting and never have a coherent definition. I have thought of the false prophets mentioned in the New Testament as infiltrators of the early Christian Churches.

I agree that Mohammad, Bahaullah and Joseph Smith are religious figures who have misled many with false ideas about Jesus and the Church. Calling them religious figures is okay. That term takes away some of the power that has been given to them by the word prophet.

I know that their followers believe that they are prophets.

True,calling them false religious figures doesn’t get the same attention.

 

[iepuras]

I guess my objection is: Terms like “False Prophets” come with enormous baggage. They are words that push buttons, cause arguments, are found insulting and never have a coherent definition. I have thought of the false prophets mentioned in the New Testament as infiltrators of the early Christian Churches.

I agree that Mohammad, Bahaullah and Joseph Smith are religious figures who have misled many with false ideas about Jesus and the Church. Calling them religious figures is okay. That term takes away some of the power that has been given to them by the word prophet.

I know that their followers believe that they are prophets.

The term “false prophet” also provides clarity in a time of moral relativism when many people don’t want to speak the truth for fear of offending.

Joseph Smith claimed to be a prophet of God. Either he really is a prophet of God or he isn’t.

I also do not feel overly concerned about calling a false prophet a false prophet when the church that person founded teaches that Christian creeds are “an abomination” and those who profess those creeds are “corrupt” (see Joseph Smith - History 1:19) and certain leaders of that church who are considered “prophets, seers and revelators” mock Catholicism and/or call the Catholic Church “the great and abominable church of the devil”.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Back to the original question.

This is a loaded question. A prophet like Mohammed?

Neither are prophets of God.

 

[iepuras]

In some respects yes and in other respects no. Muhammad’s God was apparently beyond all comprehension. Joseph Smith’s God was like us a fleshly creature who was once a man. Joseph and Muhammad did have multiple wives, although I don’t think Muhammad ever engaged in Polyandry. Both revelations seem to have behind them the belief that the previous religion revealed by God had been totally corrupted so as to require the need to establish a New People of God. I think there is another difference in how followers of the prospective prophets regard these men. Muslims utterly devote themselves to Muhammad and emulating all that he did. LDS on the other hand are more able to dismiss certain teachings and practices of their prophet (like Polygamy, polyandry and the King Follet discourse).

Actually, the LDS love Joseph Smith and hold him up as an example to follow. Of course the polygyny and polyandry are not brought up when they do that. The LDS hymnal has hymns of praise to Joseph Smith that are sung regularly during Sunday services.

The LDS church has done much to distance itself from Brigham Young, but not so much Joseph Smith. Young’s teachings that have since been formally disavowed by the LDS church include the Adam-God doctrine, blood atonement, and doctrines behind the priesthood ban on men of African descent. Polygamy is still an official teaching of the LDS church (see Section 132 of the Doctrine & Covenants) even though it is not officially practiced in an open and practical way. Even the ideas in the King Follett discourse have not been formally disavowed and many LDS still believe even though many of those ideas are not currently emphasized. The LDS church cannot distance itself too far from the teachings of Joseph Smith without undermining its entire reason for existence.

 

[Techno2000]

Back to the original question.

This is a loaded question. A prophet like Mohammed?

Neither are prophets of God.

Who do you say Muhammad is ?

 

[HelenRose]

Who do you say Muhammad is ?

A man who was born in the 6th century. He dictated a book called the Quran which, like the Book of Mormon (which by the way was written by Solomon Spaulding) became a book that many people believed to be the word of God. His teachings are followed by the present day Muslims.

I respect those who believe that he was a prophet but it is not my belief.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Actually, the LDS love Joseph Smith and hold him up as an example to follow. Of course the polygyny and polyandry are not brought up when they do that. The LDS hymnal has hymns of praise to Joseph Smith that are sung regularly during Sunday services.

The LDS church has done much to distance itself from Brigham Young, but not so much Joseph Smith. Young’s teachings that have since been formally disavowed by the LDS church include the Adam-God doctrine, blood atonement, and doctrines behind the priesthood ban on men of African descent. Polygamy is still an official teaching of the LDS church (see Section 132 of the Doctrine & Covenants) even though it is not officially practiced in an open and practical way. Even the ideas in the King Follett discourse have not been formally disavowed and many LDS still believe even though many of those ideas are not currently emphasized. The LDS church cannot distance itself too far from the teachings of Joseph Smith without undermining its entire reason for existence.

I’ve encountered Mormons on line who really don’t interact with some of the points I mentioned. One Mormon on this forum in fact went so far as to say they didn’t need to believe what Joseph Smith had revealed in the King Follet discourse because the Church had not authoritatively spoken on the subject.

While many Mormons might believe in these things, polygamy, polyandry, the belief that God was once a mortal man as much as we are, many do not despite what their Prophet and subsequent Prophets have taught. That’s not the case with Muhammad. When a Muslim disagrees with Muhammad they disagree with the reliability of the tradition itself rather than the person of Muhammad. to the Muslim Muhammad is utterly perfect, to be imitated in every respect. Mormons are more free in recognising Joseph Smith was flawed man. At least that’s my perception.

 

[iepuras]

I’ve encountered Mormons on line who really don’t interact with some of the points I mentioned. One Mormon on this forum in fact went so far as to say they didn’t need to believe what Joseph Smith had revealed in the King Follet discourse because the Church had not authoritatively spoken on the subject.

While many Mormons might believe in these things, polygamy, polyandry, the belief that God was once a mortal man as much as we are, many do not despite what their Prophet and subsequent Prophets have taught. That’s not the case with Muhammad. When a Muslim disagrees with Muhammad they disagree with the reliability of the tradition itself rather than the person of Muhammad. to the Muslim Muhammad is utterly perfect, to be imitated in every respect. Mormons are more free in recognising Joseph Smith was flawed man. At least that’s my perception.

What a Mormon believes about certain “mysteries of the kingdom” in many cases depends on the generation. The older generations readily believe more of the “out there” doctrines because they were actually taught those things as doctrine when they were younger. I am a Generation X-er so when I was LDS, I definitely believed what was taught in King Follett because it was taught to me in church (including in religion classes taught at BYU) as doctrine. I don’t think that happens as much any more. The LDS church has made a concerted effort the last 20 years to appear more mainstream Christian, so doctrines like those espoused in “King Follett” end up falling by the wayside and explained that it was never official doctrine even though many of these controversial doctrines were proclaimed as such by LDS prophets and apostles at their own General Conferences. It is explained away by saying the prophets and apostles were simply “speaking as men” although they really weren’t at the time. They were speaking as prophets of the Lord.

In a sense, Mormons are more free to recognize Joseph Smith was a flawed man, yet they cannot come out and say that he grossly sinned or lost favor with God. Just that he was “flawed” and that he may have “gone too far” or “didn’t really have a full understanding at the time”. They engage in a lot of mental gymnastics, excuse making, rationalization, and explanations on how it was not as bad as it looks.

Similar to Muslims, Mormons are able to be not entirely truthful about their actual beliefs when speaking with outsiders. For example, missionaries do not go into detail of LDS teachings prior to the baptism of converts and they routinely avoid difficult questions and topics. It is “milk before meat”. The meat doesn’t get taught (and these days is frequently flat out denied) because it could scare potential converts away.

Polygamy, or plural marriage, is definitely still doctrine and is still taught as such, however, the topic is frequently avoided because most women do not like it. It is still a teaching that polygamy will return during the “Millenium” and will definitely be lived out in the celestial kingdom. These days, most women will end up admitting that it is doctrine but that their husbands will never be asked to take on plural wives. They rationalize it away as someone else’s problem. Polygamy as a doctrine is still alive and well as at least 2 of their current apostles are polygamists according to their own beliefs.

 

[dcana]

Yes, if you accept Muhammed as a prophet it stands to reason you must also accept J.Smith.

Both claim revelation form some “Angel” that interacted with them.

And Mormons dont blow things up and are really nice people. So if anything, J.Smith has even more credibility than Muhammed.

Cool! So all I need to do is claim something? That’s great because last week I had the strangest thing happen to me. There I was, minding my own business when a heavenly being of light who called himself Gabriel appeared to me and told me that all religions are corrupt and that God had chosen me to be his messenger to save humanity. He said he was going to dictate words directly from God to me tomorrow, so I’ve got my pen and lots of paper ready. Ready to be my followers? I need some money to get God’s true religion started and spread throughout the world so I’ll require 10% of your income in order to participate in it and be saved. By the way, Gabriel told me to tell you that.

“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” (KJV)

The “gospels” (so-to-speak; more properly “messages” in these cases since they are not “good news” at all) of the Qur’an and the Book of Mormon are contrary to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the teaching of Jesus’ Church, and the “faith which was once delivered [did I emphasize that clearly enough?] unto the saints” (KJV). Therefore, according to Sacred Scripture, not me, Mohammad and Joseph Smith (and many others who have made similar claims) are accursed.

We must pray for their souls as well praying for the conversion of their adherents, that they receive the Light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, not the “gospel” of Mohammad or Joseph Smith or Bahá’u’lláh. This is purely my speculative personal opinion but I think God has had enough of humanity going our own way and will soon point out to us in a (very) obvious way the religions that are false and the one that is true, namely Christianity, that is to say Catholicism, which is to say Christianity. Not the schismatic Christianity of the Orthodox, who have not Peter as the Rock on whom Jesus said He was going to build His Church and have rejected crucial teachings of Christianity, nor especially the heretical Christianity of the Protestants, who have utterly false teachings, but Catholicism, the faith once delivered unto the saints. How many Gods are there? One. How many truths about Him? One again: “There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.”

“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” (KJV)

“Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs *, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before.” (KJV)

Jesus indeed told us this before, and we see them now, and do not follow them. Thus saith the Lord: “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” (KJV) Him we follow. He is the Lord and the full Revelation of God the Father to mankind: “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.” (KJV) These three “false prophets” (Mo, JS, and Bahá) did not even show “signs and wonders” though they claimed to have received them (like me ), and they still have deceived many. Possibly the one who will show signs and wonders will be the Antichrist, with a capital “A”. Are you all aware that the LDS are presently constructing one of their “temples” in the holy city of Rome that will hold more than 20,000 people? They continue to deceive people all over the world. God help us.

Have a blessed Sacred Triduum everyone!*

 

[dcana]

What a Mormon believes about certain “mysteries of the kingdom” in many cases depends on the generation. The older generations readily believe more of the “out there” doctrines because they were actually taught those things as doctrine when they were younger. I am a Generation X-er so when I was LDS, I definitely believed what was taught in King Follett because it was taught to me in church (including in religion classes taught at BYU) as doctrine. I don’t think that happens as much any more. The LDS church has made a concerted effort the last 20 years to appear more mainstream Christian, so doctrines like those espoused in “King Follett” end up falling by the wayside and explained that it was never official doctrine even though many of these controversial doctrines were proclaimed as such by LDS prophets and apostles at their own General Conferences. It is explained away by saying the prophets and apostles were simply “speaking as men” although they really weren’t at the time. They were speaking as prophets of the Lord.

In a sense, Mormons are more free to recognize Joseph Smith was a flawed man, yet they cannot come out and say that he grossly sinned or lost favor with God. Just that he was “flawed” and that he may have “gone too far” or “didn’t really have a full understanding at the time”. They engage in a lot of mental gymnastics, excuse making, rationalization, and explanations on how it was not as bad as it looks.

Similar to Muslims, Mormons are able to be not entirely truthful about their actual beliefs when speaking with outsiders. For example, missionaries do not go into detail of LDS teachings prior to the baptism of converts and they routinely avoid difficult questions and topics. It is “milk before meat”. The meat doesn’t get taught (and these days is frequently flat out denied) because it could scare potential converts away.

Polygamy, or plural marriage, is definitely still doctrine and is still taught as such, however, the topic is frequently avoided because most women do not like it. It is still a teaching that polygamy will return during the “Millenium” and will definitely be lived out in the celestial kingdom. These days, most women will end up admitting that it is doctrine but that their husbands will never be asked to take on plural wives. They rationalize it away as someone else’s problem. Polygamy as a doctrine is still alive and well as at least 2 of their current apostles are polygamists according to their own beliefs.

Given all this, LDS must ask themselves:

Does this sound like the true, restored Church of God, whose prophet claims to talk directly to God, or a man-made religion made up in 19th century America? Be objective about it. Look at the facts. Read history. I think many are asking themselves this very question and are answering it correctly for themselves, praise God. The internet probably has a lot to do with it, since it provides a wealth of information at one’s fingertips like never before in history as well as allowing people from all over the world to meet and share ideas. Along with many bad things, this is one good thing the internet gives us.

Hey, you don’t have to become Catholic, at least not right away. Join the Orthodox (preferably), or even some Protestant group. At least you would be Christian then. Get baptized and the Holy Spirit, the Comforter - who is God from all eternity, not a man who through some magical process became a god or whatever crazy thing they are currently teaching about Him this year - will come to you and dwell in you. In time, God will lead you all the way home if you constantly seek the truth.

In Christ, the God-Man who in His Divinity is God from all eternity and who took on flesh in time in the womb of the Virgin by the power of the Holy Spirit, who is the Lord, the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and End of all things, who is coming in glory to judge the living and the dead “according to their works”, in His own words,
David

 

[ChaosGamma]

In a sense, Mormons are more free to recognize Joseph Smith was a flawed man, yet they cannot come out and say that he grossly sinned or lost favor with God. Just that he was “flawed” and that he may have “gone too far” or “didn’t really have a full understanding at the time”. They engage in a lot of mental gymnastics, excuse making, rationalization, and explanations on how it was not as bad as it looks.

I know you’re probably talking primarily about the “main” LDS church, but don’t some groups (like the Temple Lot church, I think) actually teach that Joseph Smith fell away from his mission and taught error later on? So they accept the Book of Mormon, maybe the Book of Commandments or part of the Doctrine and Covenants but draw the line somewhere after he fell.

(I was intensely interested in the history of Mormonism once, and in particular in the differences between all the small “denominations” and the main church, but it’s been some time now since I left off on my reading.)

 

[arthra]

It was vigorously argued in another thread that Mohammed was indeed a Prophet of the Judeo-Christian God. The logic used in Mohammed’s defense seems to apply also to Joseph Smith. If so, then why would Islam (or Baha’i really) be the final (most recent???) say on the matter of God? Wouldn’t Mormanism have rightful claim to that?

I think the mode of revelation was quite different if you examine and compare Muhammad and Joseph Smith.

Muhammad revealed His revelation in the language of the people where He lived…in Arabic. The people who heard the revelations through Him recited what they received and were open to learning what was revealed:

*“He it is Who hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture wherein are clear revelations - they are the substance of the Book - and others (which are) allegorical.”

• (The Qur’an (Pickthall tr), Sura 3 - The Family Of Imran verse 7)

In the case of Joseph Smith he indicated he found the Golden Plates in a so called ancient language that only he could translate… and a coterie of his followers swore they had seen the Golden Plates … The angel Moroni is supposed have transported them to heaven.

See:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_plates

The Baha’i revelation began in 1844 with the declaration of the Bab and continued until 1892 with the passing of Baha’u’llah in the Holy Land.

 

[TonyBS]

Cool! So all I need to do is claim something?

Go ahead if you think it is like that, here is the challenge given to you from Muhammad;

Say: "If the mankind and the jinns were together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one another." [Qur'an 17:88]

And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Qur'an) to Our slave (Muhammad Peace be upon him ), then produce a surah (chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allah, if you are truthful. [Qur'an 2:23]

And this Qur'an is not such as could ever be produced by other than Allah (Lord of the heavens and the earth), but it is a confirmation of (the revelation) which was before it *, and a full explanation of the Book (i.e. laws and orders, etc, decreed for mankind) - wherein there is no doubt from the the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns,and all that exists).

Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it?" Say: "Bring then a surah (chapter) like unto it, and call upon whomsoever you can, besides Allah, if you are truthful!" [Qur'an 10:37-38]

Or they say, "He (Prophet Muhammad(P)) forged it (the Qur'an)." Say: "Bring you then ten forged surah (chapters) like unto it, and call whomsoever you can, other than Allah (to your help), if you speak the truth!" [Qur'an 11:13]

Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it (this Qur'an)?" Nay! They believe not! Let them then produce a recital like unto it (the Qur'an) if they are truthful. [Qur'an 52:33-34]

See how many Souls you attract! You have lost one already

Regards Tony*

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Go ahead if you think it is like that, here is the challenge given to you from Muhammad;

Say: "If the mankind and the jinns were together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one another." [Qur'an 17:88]

And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Qur'an) to Our slave (Muhammad Peace be upon him ), then produce a surah (chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allah, if you are truthful. [Qur'an 2:23]

Regards Tony

Define this challenge. What exactly are we supposed to produce?

 

[TonyBS]

Define this challenge. What exactly are we supposed to produce?

That question is a immediate Fail

Try again

Regards Tony

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

That question is a immediate Fail

Try again

Regards Tony

No it’s not an immediately failed question because unlike Muslims when they produce this challenge I have no idea what Bahai have in mind. The Muslim has in mind that the non believer should produce a verse or surah of equal beauty and glory to that of the Quran. They believe after all the very language of the Quran proves it’s divine origin. Do you have the same idea about the challenge of the Quran?

Perhaps you should try again and actually have a conversation Tony, instead of being a smart-alec.

 

[Servant19]

Cool! So all I need to do is claim something? That’s great because last week I had the strangest thing happen to me. There I was, minding my own business when a heavenly being of light who called himself Gabriel appeared to me and told me that all religions are corrupt and that God had chosen me to be his messenger to save humanity. He said he was going to dictate words directly from God to me tomorrow, so I’ve got my pen and lots of paper ready. Ready to be my followers? I need some money to get God’s true religion started and spread throughout the world so I’ll require 10% of your income in order to participate in it and be saved. By the way, Gabriel told me to tell you that.

“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” (KJV)

The “gospels” (so-to-speak; more properly “messages” in these cases since they are not “good news” at all) of the Qur’an and the Book of Mormon are contrary to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the teaching of Jesus’ Church, and the “faith which was once delivered [did I emphasize that clearly enough?] unto the saints” (KJV). Therefore, according to Sacred Scripture, not me, Mohammad and Joseph Smith (and many others who have made similar claims) are accursed.

We must pray for their souls as well praying for the conversion of their adherents, that they receive the Light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, not the “gospel” of Mohammad or Joseph Smith or Bahá’u’lláh. This is purely my speculative personal opinion but I think God has had enough of humanity going our own way and will soon point out to us in a (very) obvious way the religions that are false and the one that is true, namely Christianity, that is to say Catholicism, which is to say Christianity. Not the schismatic Christianity of the Orthodox, who have not Peter as the Rock on whom Jesus said He was going to build His Church and have rejected crucial teachings of Christianity, nor especially the heretical Christianity of the Protestants, who have utterly false teachings, but Catholicism, the faith once delivered unto the saints. How many Gods are there? One. How many truths about Him? One again: “There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.”

“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” (KJV)

“Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs , and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before.” (KJV)

Jesus indeed told us this before, and we see them now, and do not follow them. Thus saith the Lord: “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” (KJV) Him we follow. He is the Lord and the full Revelation of God the Father to mankind: “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.” (KJV) These three “false prophets” (Mo, JS, and Bahá) did not even show “signs and wonders” though they claimed to have received them (like me ), and they still have deceived many. Possibly the one who will show signs and wonders will be the Antichrist, with a capital “A”. Are you all aware that the LDS are presently constructing one of their “temples” in the holy city of Rome that will hold more than 20,000 people? They continue to deceive people all over the world. God help us.

Have a blessed Sacred Triduum everyone!

Did you ever study Islamic history properly??

.