Pearl of Great Price · Evidence

Joseph Smith published the Book of Abraham in 1842. Several of its strangest details show up in ancient sources that surfaced only later. Critics would rather talk about fragments.

About 1,800 words · 8-minute read

I LOVE the Book of Abraham. Not because every question about it is settled, but because the more you read it next to the ancient world, the less it looks like something a farm boy in 1840s Illinois could make up. Critics almost always want to argue about the papyri. They rarely want to talk about what the book actually says. So let’s talk about what it says.

↑ Back to contents

The fair test: what could anyone know in 1842?

Here’s the test I think is fair. The Book of Abraham ran in the Times and Seasons in March–May 1842. Champollion had only announced his hieroglyph breakthrough in 1822, and nobody in Nauvoo could read Egyptian. So the question isn’t “does the book match what a 19th-century Bible reader already knew?” The question is: does it contain details that only showed up in sources found, printed, or translated later?

Look at the dates. The Book of Jubilees didn’t reach a European language until Dillmann’s German translation in 1850–51. The Apocalypse of Abraham wasn’t printed until 1863, in Old Slavonic, and not in English until G. H. Box’s 1918 edition. Excavations at Ugarit (Ras Shamra) began in 1929. The Genesis Apocryphon came out of a cave near Qumran in 1947. All of that came after Joseph Smith died.

Timeline: 1822 Champollion’s hieroglyph breakthrough; 1835 mummies and papyri arrive in Kirtland; 1842 Book of Abraham published; 1850–51 Jubilees translated into German; 1863 Apocalypse of Abraham printed in Slavonic; 1871 Chicago fire likely destroys most papyri; 1929 Ugarit excavations begin; 1947 Genesis Apocryphon found; 20th century Ulisum inscription translated; 1967 fragments transferred to the Church.
The Book of Abraham was published in 1842. Much of the evidence below surfaced decades later.

Those later texts prove one big thing: ancient Jews and Christians kept stories about Abraham that are not in Genesis. The Apocalypse of Abraham has him rejecting his father Terah’s idols and being lifted up to see God’s throne and “the powers of heaven” in the firmaments (Box 1918). Sound familiar? It should. (I walked through the same pattern with Enoch in this post.)

↑ Back to contents

Olishem: a place name on an ancient inscription

Even the thank-offering of a child did the priest of Pharaoh offer upon the altar which stood by the hill called Potiphar’s Hill, at the head of the plain of Olishem.

Abraham 1:10

Olishem appears nowhere in the Bible. But as the Gospel Topics essay puts it: “An ancient inscription, not discovered and translated until the 20th century, mentions a town called ‘Ulisum,’ located in northwestern Syria.” Most scholars put Ur in southern Mesopotamia, but the essay notes “cogent arguments have been made for a northern location, within the realm of Egyptian influence.” A northern Ur and a Syrian Ulisum fit together nicely.

I’ll be honest about the strength here, because Egyptologist John Gee was too: he called the Olishem link “promising but not proven.” That’s exactly how evidence should be handled. But notice the critic’s position: Joseph Smith supposedly guessed an obscure place name that later turned up on a real inscription in the right region. Lucky guess number one. (More: Pearl of Great Price Central on Olishem.)

↑ Back to contents

Elkenah, the altar, and killing for refusing idols

…endeavored to take away my life by the hand of the priest of Elkenah. The priest of Elkenah was also the priest of Pharaoh.

Abraham 1:7

Elkenah is treated in the text as a god. As a deity, Elkenah is not in the Bible. Yet, in the essay’s words, “modern scholars have identified it as being among the gods worshipped by ancient Mesopotamians.” Kevin Barney makes the case for the Canaanite high god El in “On Elkenah as Canaanite El”.

…they would not bow down to worship gods of wood or of stone, therefore they were killed upon this altar, and it was done after the manner of the Egyptians.

Abraham 1:11

A critic in 1842 could easily mock that. Egyptians killing people for refusing their gods? But the essay, drawing on Egyptologists like Kerry Muhlestein, says people “who challenged the standing religious order, either in Egypt or in the regions over which it had influence (such as Canaan), could and did suffer execution for their offenses.” It goes further: “A later Egyptian text, discovered in the 20th century, tells how the Pharaoh tried to sacrifice Abraham, only to be foiled when Abraham was delivered by an angel. Later, according to this text, Abraham taught members of the Pharaoh’s court through astronomy.” That’s practically the storyline of Abraham chapters 1 and 3.

Table comparing Book of Abraham details with later scholarship: Olishem and the Ulisum inscription (promising, not proven); Elkenah identified by scholars; execution for challenging the religious order attested; Abraham teaching astronomy in Egypt in Eupolemus and Josephus; Shinehah and an Egyptian term for the sun’s path; Kolob and a proposed Semitic root meaning near or center.
What the text says vs. what scholars found later, with an honest strength rating for each.

↑ Back to contents

Abraham the astronomer, Kolob, and Shinehah

And the Lord said unto me: Abraham, I show these things unto thee before ye go into Egypt, that ye may declare all these words.

Abraham 3:15

Genesis never says Abraham taught Egyptians about the heavens. But ancient writers did. The essay cites Eupolemus, who “lived under Egyptian rule in the second century B.C.E.” and “wrote that Abraham taught astronomy and other sciences to the Egyptian priests.” And Josephus says Abraham “delivered to them the science of astronomy; for before Abram came into Egypt they were unacquainted with those parts of learning” (Antiquities 1.8.2).

Here’s where I’ll be more honest than the critics usually are: the essay itself says some of these extra-biblical details “were available to Joseph Smith through the books of Jasher and Josephus. Joseph Smith was aware of these books, but it is unknown whether he utilized them.” Fine. Count the astronomy theme as partly knowable in 1842. That still leaves Olishem, Elkenah, and the rest unexplained.

Kolob

And the Lord said unto me: These are the governing ones; and the name of the great one is Kolob, because it is near unto me, for I am the Lord thy God: I have set this one to govern all those which belong to the same order as that upon which thou standest.

Abraham 3:3

The book itself defines Kolob by nearness: it is “nearest unto the throne of God” (Abraham 3:2). Some scholars propose a connection to the Semitic root qrb/qlb, “near” or “center” (see BYU Studies). That’s a proposal, not a proof, and I won’t sell it as more. (Explore more on the Kolob topic page.)

Shinehah

Abraham 3:13 says Shinehah “is the sun.” Egyptologists have pointed out that the Coffin Texts use a name, š-n-ḫꜣ, for the sun’s path through the sky, and its spelling “matches the spelling of Shinehah in the Book of Abraham fairly closely” (BYU Studies). Another small, specific detail that wasn’t sitting in any American library in 1842.

↑ Back to contents

The facsimiles: “this earth in its four quarters”

Represents this earth in its four quarters.

Facsimile 2, figure 6

Those four small figures are what Egyptologists call the four sons of Horus. The essay notes that “a similar interpretation has been argued by scholars who study identical figures in other ancient Egyptian texts.” Then there’s Facsimile 1, figure 12: “Raukeeyang, signifying expanse, or the firmament over our heads.” That’s where a crocodile deity swims, and the essay points out the interpretation “makes sense in light of scholarship that identifies Egyptian conceptions of heaven with ‘a heavenly ocean.’” Not bad for a man critics insist couldn’t read a word of Egyptian. (For more, see the facsimiles topic page.)

↑ Back to contents

Critics test the fragments. Joseph had the rolls.

Now to the critics’ favorite topic. Joseph acquired the papyri with four mummies in 1835. Eyewitnesses described “a long roll” and multiple rolls. The collection was sold after his death, and most of it was likely destroyed in the 1871 Chicago fire. What survives are fragments the Church received from the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 1967.

Two panels. What Joseph had: papyri bought with four mummies in 1835, eyewitnesses describing “a long roll” or “rolls,” most likely destroyed in the 1871 Chicago fire. What survives: small fragments transferred from the Metropolitan Museum in 1967. Quote from the Gospel Topics essay on assessing the translation from only a fraction of the papyri.
Critics judge the translation by the fragments. Joseph had the rolls.

So when someone says “the fragments don’t match the Book of Abraham,” the honest response is: which part of the collection are you looking at? The Gospel Topics essay is clear: “It is likely futile to assess Joseph’s ability to translate papyri when we now have only a fraction of the papyri he had in his possession.” (See the Book of Abraham topic page.)

↑ Back to contents

The double standard

Here’s what I want every critic to sit with. You don’t have the original manuscript of a single book of the Bible. Not one. You have later copies. The Bible itself even cites books that are lost:

Now the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they are written in the book of Samuel the seer, and in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the book of Gad the seer,

1 Chronicles 29:29 (KJV)

Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, first and last, are they not written in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo the seer against Jeroboam the son of Nebat?

2 Chronicles 9:29 (KJV)

Where are those? Gone. Nobody says Chronicles is a fraud because its sources are missing. And the Dead Sea Scrolls revealed real differences between ancient copies of the Bible’s own text (more on the Dead Sea Scrolls topic page). So if missing originals sink the Book of Abraham, they sink a lot more than that. I lay out that whole pattern in The Hypocritical Book of Mormon Denier and in “Your church changes”.

And let’s be clear about what evidence does. The essay says it plainly: evidence “cannot prove the truthfulness of the book of Abraham any more than archaeological evidence can prove the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt or the Resurrection of the Son of God.” Believers own that. Do critics? (More evidence lists: the best Book of Mormon evidences.)

↑ Back to contents

“Thou wast chosen before thou wast born”

Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones; And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born.

Abraham 3:22–23

The essay notes these verses are “written in a poetic structure more characteristic of Near Eastern languages than early American writing style.” And the doctrine itself, that we lived before this life, echoes Jeremiah 1:5: “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee.” (See the premortal life topic page.)

For a scholar’s overview, here’s Daniel C. Peterson on the evidence for the Book of Abraham:

Daniel C. Peterson on evidence for the Book of Abraham.

Key takeaways

  • The fair test: does the Book of Abraham contain details that surfaced only after 1842? Several do.
  • Olishem matches a 20th-century inscription naming “Ulisum” in northwestern Syria (promising, not proven).
  • Elkenah, ritual killing in Egypt, and Abraham teaching astronomy all have ancient attestation.
  • Most of Joseph’s papyri were likely destroyed in 1871. Judging the translation by surviving fragments is, in the essay’s word, “futile.”
  • No original Bible manuscripts survive either, and the Bible cites lost books. Same standard for both.
Keep the conversation going

Follow @TraviXai on X for daily answers to critics, and dig deeper into any topic at galatians18.app.

Related reading

Sources

  • Video: Daniel C. Peterson on YouTube.
  • Featured image and in-post graphics: original graphics by thebookofmormon.ai (no photographs or likenesses of real people).