Two men. Two alleged prophets. One from the deserts of Arabia, the other from the hills of New York. Both claimed to bring the final, ultimate truth. But what if I told you these two religions—Islam and Mormonism—share shocking, almost eerie similarities? And what if these parallels expose them both as man-made fabrications? Today, we’re going to uncover 15 parallels between Islam and Mormonism that disprove both religions. Stay tuned, because this is going to get crazier and crazier as the list continues.

If you’ve always wanted to learn more about Islam and Mormonism, you gotta watch this entire video front to back. We’ll cover everything from conveniently lost prophecies and demonic manipulations to special marriage privileges and polygamy. We’ll also be comparing the parallels in these false religions to what we see in Jesus, our Lord and true prophet.

Before we get started, though, I want to mention two quick things. First, this video isn’t an attack on individual Muslims or Mormons—many of them are good people who live extremely moral lives. Our focus is on the prophets and historical claims of these religions and how they ultimately backfire.

Second, if you’re enjoying this content, consider subscribing and supporting us on Patreon. Without your help, we can’t continue to expose the intellectual side of Christian belief and bring you the thought-provoking material you love. And right now, you might not know this, we’re actually running at a deficit—our monthly expenses exceed our monthly support. If you see value in our work, please pause this video and pledge your support through our Patreon page, linked in the description. Your support really does make a huge difference, no matter what amount you give.

With that said, let’s jump into Parallel #1: the absolutely discrediting claim of lost prophecies foretelling their coming.

Parallel 1: The Phantom Prophecy Problem

If you don’t pay attention to any other parallel in this video, you have to pay attention to this one. In fact, I’ve already produced an entire video on this parallel alone because it’s THAT problematic. I’m calling it the Phantom Prophecy Problem. Basically, the idea is that both Muhammad and Smith claimed that prophecies from earlier scriptures foretold their coming. But—and this is key—you can’t actually find these prophecies because, conveniently, they’ve been “lost” from the original sources. But don’t worry, because BOTH prophets claimed that God re-revealed the lost prophecies about them to them.

In the Quran, Muhammad doesn’t just say that Jesus prophesied his coming. Surah 7:157 explicitly claims that Muhammad is mentioned in both the Torah and the Gospel: “Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in what they have of the Torah and the Gospel.” Moreover, in Surah 61:6, Muhammad claims that Jesus himself said, “I am the messenger of Allah… bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad.” Ahmad is a variation of the name Muhammed. The problem here is that there is no reference in any recorded history, either from Christian or non-Christian sources, of Jesus ever predicting a new prophet named Ahmed or anything remotely like that, despite how monumental and important a prediction like that would have been. This would be like Kanye West claiming that Beethoven prophesied his coming as the world’s next greatest musician, but somehow no one ever thought to write it down. No records, no fan scribbles, not even a vague mention on a napkin—despite how massive that would have been!

Alright, let’s transition and talk about Joseph Smith. A lot of Mormons don’t even know this, but Joseph Smith did the same exact thing. He claimed he was foretold in Genesis 50:33, a verse that shows up nowhere in any ancient manuscript—not in the Masoretic Text, the Septuagint, nor the Dead Sea Scrolls. In fact, this verse was completely absent from every known source until Smith conveniently added it to his Joseph Smith Translation (JST) of the Bible. The so-called prophecy also appears in the Book of Mormon (2 Nephi chapter 3), where it states that a seer named Joseph—just like Smith—would be raised up in the latter days. But, just as with Muhammed, there’s absolutely no historical evidence for the existence of verse 33 in Genesis 50–Chapter 50 has always ended at verse 26. No Jewish scholars, Christian writers, early church fathers, or pagan historians mention an extended version of Genesis 50. It doesn’t exist.

Now, let’s talk about why this is so problematic. Both Muhammad and Joseph Smith are essentially saying, “Look guys, I was prophesied in earlier sources, but you can’t check those earlier sources, because those prophecies have been lost. But don’t worry because God re-revealed that ancient prophecy about me, directly to me, again. Just trust me bros.”

Alright, let’s talk about how these stories compare with Jesus. Christianity doesn’t rely on lost prophecies. Jesus’ coming was foretold openly and clearly all over the Hebrew Scriptures, with centuries of verifiable prophecy leading up to His birth, life, death, and resurrection. Just read Isaiah, who prophesied the birth of a servant who would be called “mighty God” and “Prince of Peace”; who was “despised and rejected,” “pierced for our transgressions”; and who was “raised and lifted up.” (Is. 9; 52-53) In Christianity, there are no claims of lost texts or concealed verses—everything is out in the open. The prophecies about Jesus are transparent and traceable. That’s what sets Christianity apart from these other religions. Jesus didn’t need to create a myth about lost prophecies—His entire life was an open fulfillment of the real prophecies found in earlier manuscripts of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Transition: This is just the beginning of the eerie similarities between Muhammad and Joseph Smith. But trust me, it gets crazier. If you stick around, you’ll hear about demonic encounters, secretive revelations, and even prophets claiming divine permission for more than just spiritual matters. We’re talking about personal wealth, polygamy, and shocking marital practices—all justified by these so-called revelations. Each parallel we uncover is more disturbing than the last, so buckle up. By the end of this, you’ll see just how deep these similarities run—and why neither of these prophets can be trusted.

Parallel 2: Both Prophets Were Manipulated By Demons

Let’s talk about how both Muhammad and Joseph Smith had some pretty concerning run-ins with demonic forces that left a serious mark on their ministries.

Starting with Muhammad, according to Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, Muhammad was so convinced that he had been possessed by a jinn during his first revelation that he actually considered throwing himself off a mountain. That’s not exactly a ringing endorsement for a future prophet, is it? But it doesn’t stop there. There’s also the infamous Satanic Verses incident, where Muhammad somehow ended up reciting verses praising pagan gods. And when people started asking questions, Muhammad pulled the old “Satan made me do it” card, claiming that Satan had tricked him into speaking those words.

According to Shahab Ahmed, in his book Before Orthodoxy, “the early Muslim community believed almost universally that the Satanic verses incident was a true historical fact. As far as the overwhelming majority of the Muslim community in the first two hundred years was concerned, the Messenger of God did indeed, on at least one occasion, mistake words of Satanic suggestion as being of Divine inspiration. For the early Muslims, the Satanic verses incident was something entirely thinkable.” In other words, Muhammad literally confused Satan’s voice with God’s, and the early Muslims didn’t seem too bothered by that. Imagine your prophet mixing up God and Satan—no big deal, right?

Now, let’s move on to Joseph Smith, who also couldn’t seem to avoid dark forces in his life. Before his First Vision, Smith claimed he was overcome by a dark power, leaving him completely paralyzed and surrounded by thick darkness (this first-hand account can be found in the official Mormon Scriptures, namely in the Pearl of Great Price). And this wasn’t a one-off occurrence—Smith reported several encounters with demonic forces, conveniently happening right before his biggest revelations.

Now, let’s contrast that with Jesus Christ. When Satan came to tempt Jesus during His 40-day fast (Matthew 4:1-11), Jesus didn’t fall for any of his tricks. He didn’t mistake Satan’s voice for God’s or become paralyzed. In fact, He stood firm and sent Satan packing without breaking a sweat. Jesus wasn’t just good at resisting demonic influence; He dominated it. Jesus was well-known as an exorcist, regularly casting out demons with authority. Wherever He went, the demonically possessed trembled, and unclean spirits obeyed His commands. Whether He was healing the afflicted or casting out evil spirits, Jesus demonstrated total control over the spiritual realm. So while Muhammad and Smith were out there getting confused and paralyzed by dark forces, Jesus was showing unmatched power and authority over them. In short, Jesus is pretty based—there’s no comparison.

Transition: So, let’s recap: both prophets had ‘prophecies’ no one can find and, oh yeah, were manipulated by demons. Honestly, you couldn’t make this stuff up—except they actually did. But it wasn’t just spiritual issues that influenced them. They borrowed heavily from the world around them, mixing in pagan elements like it was a recipe for the next best-seller. Let’s check out how their ‘divine revelations’ look suspiciously human.

Parallel 3: Influence from Surrounding Pagan or Non-Religious Elements

Both Muhammad and Joseph Smith appear to have incorporated elements from their surrounding cultures into their religious systems. In Muhammad’s case, we’ve already covered the Satanic Verses and his praising three Arabian pagan gods. But there’s more! The Kaaba, originally a center for pagan worship, somehow became the holiest site in all of Islam. According to Surah 22:26-30, Muhammad reformed the rituals associated with the Kaaba, transforming it into an Islamic symbol while keeping practices like the pilgrimage intact. 

Similarly, Joseph Smith drew heavily from the literature and folklore of his time in crafting the Book of Mormon. Scholars have documented striking parallels between the Book of Mormon and contemporary works, suggesting that Smith was far more influenced by 19th-century American culture than by divine revelation.

One key example is Ethan Smith’s 1823 book, View of the Hebrews, which speculated that Native Americans were descended from the Lost Tribes of Israel. This idea strongly resembles the narrative of the Lamanites in the Book of Mormon, who are described as a people descended from ancient Israelites who migrated to the Americas.  Additionally, the names and terms used in the Book of Mormon show clear signs of influence from other contemporary sources. For example, the name “Nephi,” one of the main figures in the Book of Mormon, has no known roots in ancient Hebrew or any other ancient language. But it does appear in popular travel literature of the time. The Travels of Marco Polo, a well-known book in Joseph Smith’s day, includes a reference to “Nephi,” a name for a region in Arabia. Another example is the name “Mormon” itself, which might have been inspired by “Mormo,” a mythical figure mentioned in The Wonders of Nature, a book that was widely circulated in the early 19th century.

In contrast, Christianity maintained its consistency with the Hebrew Scriptures, and the idea of incorporating pagan elements would have been morally repugnant to the Jews of that time. The Hebrew Scriptures strongly opposed paganism, making it highly unlikely that Christianity borrowed from any pagan influences. Moreover, our earliest Christian writings come from Paul, a devout Jew at the time of his conversion, who would have been adamantly opposed to incorporating any pagan ideas into the faith. His writings make it clear that Christianity is a fulfillment of Jewish prophecy, not a synthesis with surrounding pagan cultures like we see in Islam and Mormonism.

While some atheists desperately claim that the Christian Scriptures contain pagan elements, these claims have been thoroughly rebutted, and I’ve linked videos in the description where these arguments are addressed in depth. The consistency of Christian teachings with the Hebrew Bible, along with the influence of devout Jews like Paul and Jesus’ disciples, makes it clear that Christianity didn’t borrow from surrounding pagan cultures to deliver its message.

Transition: Well, who knew prophets could have influencers too? But we’re not done yet. These guys didn’t just borrow ideas—they also conveniently retreated from society right before their biggest revelations. Let’s see what their solitude brought them.

Parallel 4: Private Revelations

Both Muhammad and Joseph Smith shared a rather curious habit: when the moral decay of their societies became too much for them, they both decided to retreat into complete isolation. And wouldn’t you know it—during these private moments of solitude, they both just so happened to receive brand-new divine revelations. Muhammad famously withdrew to the Cave of Hira, where he meditated on the idolatry in Mecca, and—right on cue—the angel Gabriel showed up with the first revelations of the Quran. According to Islamic Sira (biographies of Muhammad), this all happened in secret, far from prying eyes.

Joseph Smith, not one to be outdone, took his retreat to a grove of trees, where he claimed to have a face-to-face meeting with God the Father and Jesus Christ. And what did they tell him? Well, apparently, they informed him that all existing churches were wrong, and he was to restore the true faith. Again—this earth-shattering revelation also happened in private. So, in both cases, these prophets emerged from their private retreats as the exclusive bearers of God’s message.

Now, let’s contrast that with Jesus Christ. Did He retreat into a cave or a secluded grove to receive His revelations? Nope. Jesus did the exact opposite—His entire ministry was public, surrounded by thousands of witnesses. His teachings were delivered to crowds, His miracles performed in full view of anyone watching, and His resurrection was witnessed by hundreds, including by his enemies. The truth claims of Christianity aren’t based on secretive, private revelations in a cave or a forest. They’re rooted in verifiable public events, where people saw, heard, and experienced the works of Jesus in real time. Jesus didn’t need to hide away to make His message stick—He did everything out in the open, letting His actions speak for themselves.

So here’s the issue with Muhammad and Joseph Smith: they became prophets in private. They went in as ordinary men and came out proclaiming they were the chosen ones with no witnesses to back it up. Why all the secrecy? Well, it sure makes it easier to claim exclusive access to God’s revelation when no one else was around to verify it. Meanwhile, Christianity is based on public, historically grounded events, making it a whole different ballgame from the secretive dynamics of Islam and Mormonism. There’s no need to hide in a cave when truth is on full display.

Transition: So, let’s sum it up so far: lost prophecies, demons pulling the strings, a little mix of paganism, and surprise, surprise—‘revelations’ coming after a nice solitary retreat. Pretty suspicious lineup so far, right? But, trust me, this next part takes things up a notch. Let’s talk about how these prophets claimed supernatural abilities—like translating languages they didn’t even know. Yes, that also happened.

Parallel 5: Both Prophets Claimed Supernatural Translation Abilities

Here’s an interesting one: both Muhammad and Joseph Smith claimed to pull off miraculous translations without actually knowing the languages of the texts they were supposedly translating. Muhammad, famously illiterate, somehow managed to recite the Quran in flawless Arabic. According to Islamic tradition, this was made possible because the Quran was revealed to him directly by Allah through the angel Gabriel (Surah 96:1-5), despite the fact that Muhammad couldn’t read or write. To top it off, Surah 7:157 highlights his illiteracy as a miraculous sign of the Quran’s divine nature. Or maybe, just maybe, Muhammad’s followers later wrote stuff down and said it was from Allah?

Now, Joseph Smith didn’t let a minor detail like not knowing ancient languages stop him either. He claimed to have translated the Golden Plates, which were written in what he called “Reformed Egyptian”—a language no one’s ever heard of before or since. But here’s where it gets even more crazy: he used seer stones (also known as “Urim and Thummim”) to translate. His method? Simple. He’d put these stones inside a hat—yes, a hat—and peer into it to dictate the Book of Mormon. No need to actually study the plates or even know the original language. And just to make things even more convenient, once he was done, the Golden Plates were conveniently whisked away by an angel, making it impossible for anyone else to verify their existence—or even his ability to translate. It’s like the ultimate “trust me, bro” moment in religious history.

Now, let’s talk about how this compares to Christianity. The Christian Scriptures weren’t brought about by magic hats or mysterious stones. Instead, they were written by ordinary men, living in real-world contexts, in ordinary languages like Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic. These weren’t secretive, mystical texts—they were documents penned by people like Moses, David, John, and Paul, who lived and worked in their communities. Their writings were passed down to be shared and studied, with no need for secret divine dictations or magical translation tools.

Christianity’s Scriptures are backed by thousands of manuscripts—from the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Codex Sinaiticus—which have been preserved and studied for centuries by scholars. No disappearing plates, no mystical rituals—just real documents, accessible to anyone willing to engage with them. The Bible’s origins aren’t shrouded in secrecy; they’re grounded in historical reality and ordinary human language, standing up to scrutiny for millennia.

Transition: Supernatural translations without even knowing the language? Sounds legit, right? I mean, who needs years of study when you’ve got magic stones or an angel doing the heavy lifting. But the fun doesn’t stop here. Let’s move on to the pièce de résistance: brand-new scriptures. Because why =fulfill existing prophecies when you can just rewrite everything?

Parallel 6: Introduction of New Scriptures

Here’s a parallel that really highlights the difference in approach between Muhammad, Joseph Smith, and Jesus Christ. Both Muhammad and Smith introduced entirely new scriptures that were meant to supplement or even replace the Bible as the final word of God. Muhammad claimed that the Quran was the ultimate revelation, the corrective text meant to supersede all previous scriptures. In Surah 5:48, the Quran states that it came to confirm previous revelations and to act as a criterion over them—essentially establishing itself as the definitive religious text for all time. Interestingly, the Quran even asserts that Jesus brought His own book, the Injeel, but there is no historical record of Jesus ever writing or producing any scripture during His ministry. As scholar Gabriel Said Reynolds points out, this presents a serious problem for Islamic claims about Jesus.

Similarly, Joseph Smith introduced the Book of Mormon, subtitled “Another Testament of Jesus Christ.” According to Smith, this book restored lost truths and was to be used alongside the Bible. But Smith didn’t stop there—he also produced the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price, establishing entirely new scriptures to guide his followers. Both Muhammad and Smith believed the existing scriptures were incomplete or corrupted and that something new was needed to provide ultimate guidance for their followers.

By contrast, Jesus Christ didn’t introduce any new scriptures during His ministry. We have no historical evidence that he ever claimed to have received a corrective text directly from God. And here’s why that’s important: Jesus didn’t need to. His mission wasn’t to replace or rewrite the Hebrew Scriptures (the Old Testament), but to fulfill them. Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection were understood by His followers as the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies—not an addition or a correction of them. Jesus didn’t discard the Old Testament; He consistently referred to it, quoted it, and explained how His actions fulfilled it (for example, see Matthew 5:17). This shows a continuity with what came before, not a need to rewrite or introduce a new foundation.

Here’s the key point: a true prophet would do exactly what Jesus did—live out, fulfill, and continue the established scriptures, showing that God’s revelation was already unfolding according to His plan. This requires integrity, courage, and a genuine connection to the divine. A false prophet, on the other hand, would take the much easier route—like Muhammad and Joseph Smith—and claim that the old scriptures were corrupted or incomplete, using that as an excuse to introduce something entirely new. Why? Because it’s far simpler to rewrite history or claim to “correct” an ancient text than it is to prove your legitimacy through the fulfillment of long-standing prophecies.

Transition: So, now we’re adding new books to the Bible. If you can’t find your prophecy, why not just create an entire new set of scriptures? Makes absolute perfect sense… if you’re making it up. And don’t think it stopped there. Both prophets also left behind quite the mess when they died. Family schisms, anyone? Let’s dig into how their followers couldn’t even agree on who should take over.

Parallel 7: Familial Schisms Following Their Deaths

It’s almost funny how after their deaths, both Muhammad and Joseph Smith left their followers in what can only be described as a family feud. In Islam, when Muhammad passed away, his followers didn’t exactly agree on who should lead the growing movement. The Shia believed that leadership should stay within the family, insisting that Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law, Ali, was the rightful successor. To them, it was practically a family business, and leadership was something that needed to be kept in the bloodline. On the other hand, the Sunni majority took a more democratic approach, saying, “Nah guys, let’s try and avoid blatant nepotism.” They appointed Abu Bakr, a close companion of Muhammad, as the first caliph. And just like that, Islam split into two major factions, all because of a good old-fashioned succession crisis.

Mormonism didn’t fare much better. After Joseph Smith was assassinated, the question of who would take the reins wasn’t exactly clear. Enter Brigham Young, who led the majority of Smith’s followers out to Utah to start what became The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS). But not everyone was on board with Young’s leadership. Some believed that the rightful successor should be Joseph Smith’s son, Joseph Smith III, because, you know, nepotism. This group formed what’s now called the Community of Christ, claiming that the prophetic line should stay in the Smith bloodline.

In both cases, we see a remarkable pattern: followers divided into factions, with some arguing that family ties were the divine criteria for leadership. It’s almost as if these religions were running like dynasties, where bloodline mattered more than the message. These family squabbles led to long-lasting sectarian splits, showing just how fragile the foundations were when the prophets themselves weren’t around to keep the peace.

Now, let’s contrast that with Christianity. When Jesus Christ died, He didn’t leave the leadership in the hands of His cousins or relatives. There was no internal bickering about whether His cousin should take over. Instead, He entrusted His apostles, particularly Peter, with the mission to lead and spread His teachings (Matthew 16:18). The early Christian community stayed united under apostolic leadership, with the succession of authority based on spiritual calling rather than family connections. No “keep it in the family” nonsense in Christianity. While Islam and Mormonism were busy tearing themselves apart over familial succession, Christianity kept its eyes on the mission, not the genealogy.

Transition: Let’s talk about how both prophets managed to use their religious authority to pad their bank accounts. Yep, it’s time to follow the money.

Parallel 8: Acquisition of Tremendous Wealth Through Religious Means

Here’s something definitely worth noting: both Muhammad and Joseph Smith didn’t just build religious movements—they built their bank accounts. Muhammad, for example, didn’t shy away from using his leadership role to acquire substantial wealth. Thanks to his successful military campaigns, the spoils of war started piling up, and wouldn’t you know it, a special portion was set aside just for him. According to Surah 8:41, Allah commanded that Muhammed was to be given special access to one-fifth of all the spoils from war. While his followers fought in battle, Muhammad was getting paid.

Joseph Smith wasn’t exactly living on crumbs either. Sure, he introduced tithing—a common practice in Christian churches—but Smith went well beyond the norm. He wasn’t content with just ten percent from his followers. He managed to personally amass significant wealth by acquiring large amounts of land and properties. His religious empire in Nauvoo became a hub of economic activity, and let’s just say a lot of that wealth ended up in Joseph Smith’s pocket. This wasn’t just about running a church—it was about building an empire under the banner of spiritual leadership. It actually looks a lot like the contemporary Prosperity Gospel movement.

Now, let’s talk about Jesus Christ. Here’s a guy who didn’t bother with wealth at all. In fact, He lived in material poverty and actively opposed any mixing of religion and financial gain. When He saw the money changers exploiting faith for profit in the temple, He didn’t set aside a cut for Himself—He literally turned over their tables and drove them out (Matthew 21:12-13). Unlike Muhammad and Smith, who profited from their religious positions, Jesus made it clear that faith wasn’t for sale. He showed a life of humility and self-sacrifice, rejecting the idea of gaining material wealth from His spiritual authority. It’s pretty interesting how Jesus seemed more interested in purity of worship than amassing fortunes.

Transition: Alright, let’s recap: so far we’ve got suspicious prophecies, demonic mishaps, plagiarism from the local culture, family drama, and now—money, lots and lots of money. Let’s talk about how they also managed to humanize God himself—giving him body parts like they were designing a superhero. Yep, that also happened.

Parallel 9: Anthropomorphized Concepts of God

This next parallel might catch some people off guard, but both Islam and Mormonism seem to portray God with some pretty human-like features. In Islam, even though scholars will bend over backward to insist that God’s attributes are unlike anything we know, the Quran still describes God with terms like hands, eyes, shins, and feet. For example, Surah 38:75 mentions God’s hands when He creates Adam, and Surah 48:10 talks about God placing His hand over the hands of believers. The earliest Islamic scholars take these descriptions literally, claiming that God does indeed have these body parts—though, of course, they’re supposedly “uncreated” and “unlike” human equivalents. Sure. But let’s be honest: when you’re saying “hands” and “feet”, they’re still hands and feet—it’s hard to get away from that. So, we’re left with a God who, despite being praised for His transcendence, ends up sounding a lot like a creature with body parts.

Now, Mormonism takes this to a whole new level. According to Doctrine and Covenants, God the Father doesn’t just have metaphorical body parts—He has an actual, literal body of flesh and bones. Yep, in Mormon theology, God is fully embodied, interacting with the physical world like any one of us. And it doesn’t stop there. Joseph Smith taught that God was once a man who worked His way up to godhood, and humans can do the same. So, in Mormonism, God is literally human in form, with a tangible body. And I mean, who doesn’t want to think of God as a superhuman version of ourselves? But, at what cost? God is now just another part of the created universe, with flesh and bones, like everyone else. Suddenly, the infinite and transcendent Creator is reduced to a physical being climbing the ladder of divinity.

What’s striking is how both Islam and Mormonism make God much more relatable by turning Him into someone we could almost run into at the supermarket. Whether it’s “uncreated” body parts in Islam or an actual human body in Mormonism, both religions shift away from the idea of a spiritual, incorporeal God and give us a God that’s more like us. It’s almost as if these religions are fashioning God in our image, instead of the other way around. Convenient, right? When God has hands, feet, and a physical body, it sure makes Him easier to picture—but also makes Him a lot less… well, God-like.

Now, contrast this with Christianity. In orthodox Christian belief, God is spirit (John 4:24), and He’s utterly transcendent—He exists beyond corporeal limitations. The Christian God isn’t bound by space, time, or form. He’s not walking around with hands and feet. And while God did take on a human body in the person of Jesus Christ, that was a one-time, unique act of incarnation—done not to show God’s eternal nature but to redeem humanity. God became man contingently, not because He’s always had a body, but because it was part of His divine plan to save us. His divine essence remains entirely incorporeal, untouched by physical limitations. Unlike the versions of God in Islam and Mormonism, Christianity’s God isn’t a superhuman—He’s the eternal, infinite Creator, utterly beyond all creaturely comparisons.

Transition: Ok, so God has hands and feet now? Right? And apparently, he shops at the same store as us, too. No big deal, just the Creator of the Universe with a literal body, no different than us. But wait—there’s more! As if defining God in our image wasn’t enough, both prophets also managed to completely switch up who God cared about. Out with the old, in with the new—because apparently, God changed his mind on who his chosen people were.

Parallel 10: Discontinuity in the God of Islam and Mormonism

This next parallel might be one of the most damning of them all. In both Islam and Mormonism, we get a God who seems to switch allegiances like He’s picking a new favorite baseball team. In the Old Testament, God is clearly the God of the Hebrews—He forms a covenant with the Israelites, sticks with them through thick and thin, and sends prophets to guide them. In the New Testament, it’s the same God, sending the Hebrew Messiah to the Hebrews in, of course, the land of the Hebrews—Israel. Everything seems pretty consistent God is staying true to His covenant, continuing His story with the Hebrew people.

But then, in both Islam and Mormonism, God seems to go through a bit of a midlife crisis. In Islam, He suddenly decides to become the God of the Arabs. Muhammad shows up claiming that the final revelation has been given to him in Arabic, and the Quran—while acknowledging the earlier revelations to the Hebrews—somehow becomes the ultimate authority. It’s as if God got tired of the Hebrews and decided it was time to switch focus to a new market. And in Mormonism, it’s even more drastic: God supposedly shifts His attention to ancient America, where Joseph Smith claims to restore the true faith through revelations about the Nephites, a completely new people group that—surprise!—has no connection to the Hebrews. Apparently, God had had enough of Israel and decided to check out the New World.

Here’s the glaring problem: why would God, after thousands of years of intimate connection with the Hebrews, suddenly switch gears to an entirely new people group? It’s like someone plagiarized the Hebrew God’s storyline and slapped it onto a new location with a new cast. Islam and Mormonism look like they borrowed the general concept of the Hebrew God and decided to remix it for a fresh audience. It’s as if God just got up one day and said, “You know what? Let’s try something different. The Hebrews had a good run, but it’s time to take this show on the road.” But that’s not how God works.

In stark contrast, Christianity stays firmly planted in its Hebrew roots. Jesus was a Hebrew, and He didn’t claim to bring some new, random revelation for a completely unrelated people group. Instead, He claimed to be the fulfillment of the Hebrew messianic prophecies. Christianity doesn’t involve any sudden, suspicious break from the past—it’s the continuation of the same God and promises that guided the Hebrews from the beginning. But in Islam and Mormonism, we see a God who just abandons His people, making it all seem a little too convenient—and more than a little dubious.

Transition: So apparently God likes to switch sides? Yeah, that definitely checks out… uh no. But don’t worry, we’re not done yet. Let’s take a look at how salvation became less about grace and more about climbing a cosmic rewards ladder.

Parallel 11: Works-Based Salvation with Multiple Levels of Heaven

Here’s an interesting parallel: both Islam and Mormonism believe in works-based salvation and multiple levels of heaven. In Islam, your deeds are what determine where you’ll spend eternity. Surah 18:107 makes it clear that those who do good will get to chill in gardens of paradise. But don’t get too comfortable—there’s a catch: Islam teaches different levels of paradise, so the better you are, the higher your spot in the afterlife. Basically, it’s a tiered system, with the most righteous snagging the VIP seating.

Mormonism isn’t much different. In fact, Joseph Smith took it up a notch with his three-tiered version of heaven. According to Doctrine and Covenants 76, there’s the celestial, terrestrial, and telestial kingdoms. Think of it as heaven’s economy, business, and first class. The more righteous you are, the higher your seat upgrade in the afterlife. The celestial kingdom is for those who really hit the spiritual jackpot, while the lesser levels are reserved for those who didn’t quite make it to top-tier righteousness. So, in both Islam and Mormonism, your heavenly accommodations are tied directly to your moral achievements.

Now, contrast this with Christianity. In the Christian worldview, salvation isn’t something you earn—it’s a gift. Ephesians 2:8-9 makes it crystal clear: you’re saved by grace through faith, not because you’ve racked up enough good deeds to get into the good place. There’s no tiered heaven in Christianity—no celestial, terrestrial, or telestial system. There’s just one heaven, and it’s open to all who believe in Jesus Christ, regardless of how many gold stars they earned in this life. In short, it’s not about moral achievements, it’s about grace. 

Transition: VIP sections in the afterlife—what a concept! Heaven is apparently just a bigger version of your frequent flyer program. But what’s more shocking is the next topic: polygamy. Yep, you heard me right. Let’s dive into the wonderful world of divinely commanded polygamy.

Parallel 12: Divinely Commanded Polygamy

So here’s a pretty spicy one: both Islam and Mormonism got the green light for polygamy from none other than their respective prophets, who claimed divine endorsement for the practice. In Islam, the Quran explicitly allows men to marry up to four wives—as long as they can treat them all justly (Surah 4:3). Of course, Muhammad himself didn’t stick to that limit. Why would he? He conveniently received revelations that permitted him to exceed the four-wife cap in Surah 33:50. So, while the average guy had to deal with four wives max, Muhammad got special treatment straight from the top. Must be nice to have customized divine commands!

Not to be outdone, Joseph Smith brought polygamy into Mormonism, claiming it was a direct command from God. According to Doctrine and Covenants 132, not only was polygamy allowed—it was necessary for exaltation in the afterlife. That’s right, the celestial upgrade came with a catch: you had to marry multiple wives. Smith himself took full advantage of this heavenly mandate, marrying over 30 women and encouraging his followers to do the same. For a while, polygamy became a core part of Mormon life, with many early Mormon leaders building their own extended families, all under the banner of divine command.

Here’s what’s really notable: both Muhammad and Joseph Smith claimed that God Himself commanded polygamy as part of their religious frameworks. It wasn’t just an option—it became a mark of faithfulness to their respective religions. You weren’t just following the divine law by marrying multiple wives; you were practically earning spiritual bonus points! Sex, money, and power. These guys had it all! 

In contrast, Christianity took a much simpler route. Jesus Christ affirmed the Genesis ideal of one man and one woman (Matthew 19:4-6), and monogamy became the standard in Christian teaching. While polygamy was tolerated in the Old Testament—mostly as a reflection of human failings—it’s not part of the New Covenant. The Christian view emphasizes the sanctity of monogamous marriage, rooted in the example of Christ and the Church. No extra wives, no special revelations needed to change the rules—just the good old-fashioned one-man-one-woman model.

Transition: We’ve covered a lot already—dodgy prophecies, demonic manipulation, family feuds, financial gain, anthropomorphized gods, and now… polygamy. It just keeps getting better and better. But don’t worry, we’re not done with the marriage talk yet. Turns out both prophets made some extra special marital rules just for themselves. Let’s dig into their exclusive privileges.

Parallel 13: Special Marital Privileges

Let’s talk about how both Muhammad and Joseph Smith managed to snag themselves some special marital privileges, conveniently beyond what was permitted to their followers. In Islam, the Quran generally limits men to four wives (Surah 4:3). But for Muhammad? Oh no, the rules didn’t apply to him. Surah 33:50 gave Muhammad a special divine exemption, allowing him to exceed the standard 4-wife limit. While the average guy had to stick to the four-wife limit, Muhammad was blessed with a customized marriage plan straight from God.

Joseph Smith wasn’t about to miss out on the fun either. According to Doctrine and Covenants 132, polygamy wasn’t just divinely sanctioned—it was essential for exaltation in the afterlife. But Smith didn’t stop at your average polygamy. He took it further, marrying at least 30 women, including some who were already married to other men. This practice of polyandry—something not extended to his followers—was justified by Smith as part of God’s grand plan. Doctrine and Covenants 132 explicitly outlines polygamy and includes special provisions for Joseph Smith, granting him the authority to perform these marriages as part of his prophetic mission.

But that’s not all. William Clayton, Joseph Smith’s personal secretary, kept a journal documenting many of these revelations and marriages. His entries confirm that Smith married women who were already married to other men—something the average Mormon wasn’t allowed to do. Clayton’s journal shows how Smith’s marital practices were presented as divinely commanded, giving him greater marital freedoms than anyone else in the community. Essentially, Smith had a special pass from God to operate by his own set of relationship guidelines, while his followers were held to a different standard.

What’s really striking here is how both Muhammad and Joseph Smith granted themselves greater marital freedoms under the guise of divine approval. And let’s be honest: this is exactly what you’d expect from a false prophet—create self-serving exceptions while pretending it’s all part of a divine command. It’s actually the perfect setup for a false prophet: use religion to justify your personal desires while your followers get stuck with the more restrictive rules.

In stark contrast, Jesus Christ never sought additional privileges for Himself. He didn’t carve out special rules for His own benefit. Instead, Jesus lived by the same moral and ethical standards He taught to others. No extra wives—indeed, no wives at all. And no hidden exceptions—just the same moral responsibility He expected from His followers. Christianity emphasizes the equal moral responsibilities of all believers, standing in sharp contrast to the self-serving exemptions Muhammad and Joseph Smith gave themselves.

Transition: That’s right, while everyone else was stuck with the rules, these guys got their own ‘divine exemptions.’ What a sweet deal, well, if you’re into that kind of thing. But if you thought that was bad, it gets even worse. Let’s talk about how they got divine permission to marry close relatives next. Because, of course, the rules don’t apply when you’re the one making them.

Parallel 14: Divine Permission to Marry Close Relatives

Let’s dive into yet another example of divine exceptions being handed out like candy when it comes to marital privileges. Both Muhammad and Joseph Smith managed to get themselves special permissions to marry close relatives, further expanding their already flexible marriage rules. In Islam, Muhammad received a revelation that gave him the green light to marry Zaynab, who just so happened to be the ex-wife of his adopted son, Zayd. Now, considering that adoption was culturally seen as creating familial bonds, this marriage raised more than a few eyebrows. But don’t worry—Surah 33:37 conveniently swoops in to justify the union, explaining that adopted sons don’t create the same familial ties as biological sons. So, essentially, Muhammad’s marriage to his adopted son’s ex-wife was just another divine exception to the rules.

Not to be left out of the “special privileges” club, Joseph Smith also claimed divine permission for his own morally questionable marriages. Smith married several women who were his foster daughters and other relatives connected to him through familial ties, all under the banner of God’s plan for restoring the gospel. Just like Muhammad, Smith found a way to justify these family-related marriages by claiming they were part of a divine command, expanding his marital privileges far beyond what any of his followers could hope for

What’s truly revealing here is how both Muhammad and Joseph Smith used the concept of divine exceptions to justify marriages that would otherwise be seen as morally questionable—or at least make for some really awkward family reunions. This is exactly what you’d expect from a false prophet: bending the rules for personal gain while claiming God’s approval to do so. And while some Old Testament prophets did marry relatives, they never claimed divine permission to do so. Those marriages were simply part of the cultural context, not special “get-out-of-awkwardness-free” cards from God.

But the biggest contrast? Jesus Christ. Unlike these fake prophets, Jesus didn’t go around seeking divine exceptions. He didn’t have special privileges, no bending the rules to suit His personal desires—just a consistent life of righteousness, leaving no room for the kind of divine loopholes Muhammad and Joseph Smith loved to exploit.

Transition: So, here’s where we stand: we’ve laid out how both Muhammad and Joseph Smith crafted divine loopholes to justify marrying close relatives, granting themselves privileges that reek of self-interest rather than divine inspiration. In this video we’ve covered lost prophecies, demonic encounters, wealth grabs, and polygamy, and at every turn, these so-called prophets manipulated their authority to suit their own desires. But hold on—this next parallel takes things even further. It’s not just about bending rules; it’s about crossing serious moral lines that no genuine prophet would ever cross. Let’s get into how both Muhammad and Joseph Smith justified marrying very young girls under the banner of divine command. Brace yourselves.

Parallel 15: Both Prophets Took Very Young Wives

Both Muhammad and Joseph Smith took very young wives, and naturally, they both claimed that these actions were divinely sanctioned. In Islam, it’s well known that Muhammad married Aisha when she was, to put it mildly, extremely young. According to Sahih al-Bukhari, Aisha was just six years old when she was betrothed to Muhammad, and the marriage was consummated when she was nine. Because when you’re a prophet, God apparently signs off on everything—even marriages to pre-teens.

Joseph Smith didn’t stray far from this playbook either. He married Helen Mar Kimball, who was 14 years old at the time, and the daughter of one of his close associates, Heber C. Kimball. Helen later wrote that the marriage was presented as a divine command, part of Smith’s broader practice of polygamy, which often involved younger wives. Just like Muhammad, Smith justified these controversial marriages by claiming they were necessary for the restoration of the gospel. I mean, nothing says “restoring the gospel” like taking a 14-year old bride, right?

Once again, this fits perfectly into the pattern we’d expect from a false prophet: using supposed divine approval to engage in practices that just so happen to be personally gratifying.

Now, let’s contrast this with Jesus Christ. Not only did Jesus not marry young girls—or anyone, for that matter—He lived a life of selfless service and moral purity. Christianity holds Jesus up as the ultimate moral example, and He never sought to claim special privileges or exemptions, especially ones that would be ethically questionable by any standard. Instead of bending the rules to satisfy personal desires, Jesus consistently upheld the highest standards of integrity and morality.

Conclusion: The Undeniable Parallels Between Islam and Mormonism

These 15 parallels make it impossible to deny the pattern that emerges between Islam and Mormonism. Both Muhammad and Joseph Smith built entire religions on re-revealed prophecies, tremendous wealth, overwhelming power, and self-serving privileges that allowed them to shape their movements according to their own devious desires.

By contrast, Christianity stands in a class of its own. Jesus Christ didn’t seek special privileges, earthly power, or hidden revelations. He lived a public life of sacrifice and humility, with a ministry that was publicly witnessed and historically verifiable. There was no secret knowledge, no self-serving exceptions—just the clear, open truth of the Gospel. The difference between Christianity and these man-made religions couldn’t be more obvious.So, if you’re comparing the evidence, the choice is clear: Christianity is true.

FURTHER READING

WHO IS THE ELOHIM OF MORMONISM?, PT. 2

THE MORMON SATAN & PREMORTALITY

THE BIBLICAL GOD VERSUS THE MORMON GODS, PT. 2, PT. 2B

YHWH: THE ONLY TRUE ELOHIM

JOSEPH SMITH THE FALSE PROPHET DEBATE

NOTES FOR MORMON DEBATE