Question: Do the statements in the Book of Abraham regarding Kolob's revolution time make any sense?

PlanetReckoning

Criticism

"LDS doctrine regarding astronomy is permeated with references to time being measured, or 'reckoned' according to a star's or planet's rate of rotation. Furthermore, this 'reckoning of time' is a prime distinguisher in terms of 'greatness.' From the standpoint of modern cosmology, this makes no sense at all. Rates of rotation are largely arbitrary, and of little comment or concern from a fundamental point of view."

Source(s) of the criticism

• Duwayne R. Anderson, Farewell to Eden- Coming to terms with Mormonism and Science (First Books Library, 2003) 110-114.
• Website: MormonThink, Article: "Conflicts with Science," URL: mormonthink.com (Last accessed: 3 Aug. 2009) FAIR review

Response

Mr. Anderson and the authors of the web page have confused rotation with revolution. Though the technical distinction is often blurred today, even by astronomers, at the time of Joseph Smith the two terms denoted technically different things. 'To rotate' means to spin on an axis, like a top or like a planet. It applies only to an extended body. 'To revolve' means to go around a central point and may may be applied to one point that moves around another point. The Book of Abraham uses the term 'revolution,' and it is clearly being used in the technically correct sense. According to Abraham 3:5,9,

5 And the Lord said unto me: The planet which is the lesser light, lesser than that which is to rule the day, even the night, is above or greater than that upon which thou standest in point of reckoning, for it moveth in order more slow; this is in order because it standeth above the earth upon which thou standest, therefore the reckoning of its time is not so many as to its number of days, and of months, and of years.

9 And thus there shall be the reckoning of the time of one planet above another, until thou come nigh unto Kolob, which Kolob is after the reckoning of the Lord’s time; which Kolob is set nigh unto the throne of God, to govern all those planets which belong to the same order as that upon which thou standest. (emphasis added)

So the picture is geocentric (nothing wrong with that — Relativity tells us that one point is as good as another), and clearly refers to the revolution of the heavenly bodies about the Earth. The Earth rotates on its axis once per day and a point on the surface of the earth revolves about the axis at the same rate. The Moon is next, with an orbital period of 27.32 days. The Moon also rotates about its own axis in the same time. (This is not a coincidence, but the result of tidal dissipation.) The Sun is slower still, with a sidereal period of 365.256363 days. The solar rotation period, by the way, is about 24.5 days at its equator and a little longer as one approaches the solar poles. And, apparently, Kolob revolves about the Earth once per... Well, does Abraham ever give the time for Kolob to revolve around the Earth, as seen from Earth? Remember that God does not live on Kolob. Kolob is only the great star that is nearest to the throne of God. In Abraham 3꞉4, we read

4 And the Lord said unto me, by the Urim and Thummim, that Kolob was after the manner of the Lord, according to its times and seasons in the revolutions thereof; that one revolution was a day unto the Lord, after his manner of reckoning, it being one thousand years according to the time appointed unto that whereon thou standest. This is the reckoning of the Lord’s time, according to the reckoning of Kolob.

which seems to say that Kolob's orbital period about the throne of God is 1000 years, and that it is used by God as his unit of time. Of course, since Kolob is still far above the Sun, as seen from the Earth, it "moveth in order more slow" (Abraham 3꞉4), so it encircles and "governs" all intervening stars and planets. We are left to wonder. Is the Throne of God at the center of the Galaxy (in which case it would take 22,000,000 years to orbit the Earth) or at the center of the Universe (in which case, observations limit the rotation of the Universe to be very small or zero), or is it somewhere else altogether?

Conclusion

Once again, a critic of Joseph Smith's revelations has chosen to interpret difficult and ambiguous phrasing in a way that serves his attack — a straw man that is easily demolished. But Abraham's astronomical statements are far more reasonable than the critics claim and fit into a picture that makes sense in the cosmic world view of Abraham's contemporaries, a conclusion that was also reached in John Gee's 2009 FAIR conference talk, "The Larger Issue".