Kolob As Sirius......Spare The Puns

[Olavarria]

Disclaimer: I do not believe that the Book of Abraham(BoA) astronomy is reconcilable with any modern or future science. I believe it is an ancient geocentric astronomy. I do not believe that God lives on a planet that orbits Sirius. I believe the BoA astronomical model looked something like this:

The following are my reasons for identifying Sirius with Kolob.

1)Kolob might be a derivative of the word "dog".

Proto-Semitic : *kalb

Arabic : kalb كَلْب

Hebrew : keleb כֶּלֶב

Ugaritic : klb

Ge'ez : kalb

2)Sirius has consistently been called the "dog star" since the begining of Mesopotamian civilization. The Assyrians called it Kalbu Shamash "dog of the sun".

3)Figure 1 of Facsimile 2 is a depiction of "the birth of the sun, whose four heads represent the first four generations of creation". If we are using the hypocephalus as a visual aid for Abraham's astronomy, then Kolob is identified with the rising sun.

4)Sirius was known as Sothis to the ancient Egyptians. They were aware that it made its first heliacal rising (i.e., rose just before sunrise) of the year at about the time the annual floods were beginning in the Nile River delta. They long believed that Sothis caused the Nile floods, and they discovered that the heliacal rising of the star occurred at intervals of 365.25 days rather than the 365 days of the solar year.

Viewing Kolob was Sirius would explain why the Egyptians would be so interested in what Abraham had to say about astronomy for the astronomy God taught Abraham was merely a device for getting the Pharaoh's attention(Abraham 3:15) and because God speaks to men at their level, not His(D&C 1:24).

Edited November 3, 2011 by Pedro A. Olavarria

[Robert F. Smith]

This is an interesting theory, which you have mentioned before on this Board http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/54884-kolob-as-sirius/ , and there is something admittedly attractive about Ptolemaic geocentrism and an application of the Dog-star to the definition of Kolob. After all, John Gee, William J. Hamblin, and Daniel C. Peterson have long since made an explicit argument in favor of a geocentric interpretation of Book of Abraham astronomy (see their “‘And I Saw Stars’: The Book of Abraham and Ancient Geocentric Astronomy,” in J. Gee & B. M. Hauglid. eds., Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant, Studies in the Book of Abraham 3 [FARMS, 2005], 5-13).

Then too, the Semitic root klb “dog” can certainly be interpreted as bright Sirius, or even as Akkadian Kalbu, The Dog,” the Mesopotamian name for the southern part of the constellation Hercules/Herakles (Jeremy Black, Concise Dictionary of Akkadian, 142; Gary Thompson, Late Mesopotamian Constellations: Assyrian Mul.Apin Series), which sits just above the 326.5̊ point on the galactic equator (Milky Way), on a direct line to the Galactic Center where the star counts are the highest. Kalbu Shamash “Dog of the Sun” is Canis Major (star alpha therein is Sirius, the brightest star in the sky), which together with Canis Minor represent the two hunting Dogs of Orion the Hunter (Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, 24/14 [1983], 18).

The trouble with all that is that (1) in Egypt Sirius is the female goddess Spdt/Sothis, and there is nothing dog-like about her, (2) the Book of Abraham provides an internal etymology for Kolob which is completely unrelated to the Dog-star, but is cognate with Egyptian, and (3) claims that the BofA is geocentric are in error (see especially M. Rhodes & J. Moody, “Astronomy and the Creation in the Book of Abraham,” in Gee & Hauglid, eds., Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant, 17-36; cf. Alma 30:44, Helaman 12:15, Isaiah 40:22).

BofA Kolob is best interpreted as Afro-Asiatic *qlb/qrb “near; center, heart (of cosmic region),” based on the etymology provided in the BofA itself: 3:3 “the name of the great one is Kolob, because it is near unto me”; 3:16 “Kolob is the greatest of all the Kokau­beam [Hebrew kokkabim "stars"] . . , because it is nearest unto me"; facsimile 2:1 "Kolob, signifying the first creation, nearest to the celestial, or the residence of God.” Cf. Hebrew קרב qarob "near"; Arabic qalb "heart; empyrean heaven."

Indeed, as Kevin Christensen points out, the Arabs considered bright and stable Canopus to be Qalb at-Taiman “Heart of the South” = Hathor in ancient Egypt (K. Christensen, “New Wine and New Bottles: Scriptural Scholarship as Sacrament,” Dialogue, 24/3 [Fall 1991], 124, citing G. de Santillana & H. von Dechend, Hamlet’s Mill, 73-74). And, as you know, Canopus is the second brightest star in the sky, and the Greek name for it is Kanobos. Remove the -os termination, and it looks suspiciously like a derivation from Kolob.

[Stargazer]

As an amateur astronomer I don't think there's any chance that Kolob has anything to do with Sirius. It makes no sense at all. When God told Abraham about Kolob, Abraham was free to conceive any star he could see might be the indicated celestial body, and since Sirius has a certain prominence, it wouldn't be at all surprising for him to think that Kolob and Sirius were one in the same.

HOWEVER, it does not matter whether Abraham or anyone else thought or thinks that Sirius is somehow involved with regulating or ruling over any other stars in the heavens. What anyone thinks is not at all authoritative. First of all, and in my opinion this is the most important consideration, Sirius is by no means old enough to be considerable as a regulating body. It is a very hot star of spectral type A, twice the mass of our sun, and is only about 250 million years old. It's about halfway through its expected lifespan on the main sequence It is accompanied by a white dwarf companion, forming a double-star system; the white dwarf is the remnant of a much larger star of originally 5 solar masses and is believed to have basically burned itself out about 120 million years ago. They apparently formed together. Our sun is presently 5 billion years old, and the Universe itself is about 14 billion years old. How can anyone imagine that a pair of stars that ignited such a long time after the Big Bang, AND is expected to burn out in merely another 250-500,000 years, is going to be regulating anything? If it is regulating anything, and short-lived stars like that are being used a Celestial HQs, then God has to be transferring the flag awfully darned frequently.

There is no possible way Sirius could be Kolob. Kolob doesn't even have to be in this Galaxy, for goodness sake.

All that being said, however, it would make a certain amount of sense for God placing his Celestial HQ very close to the place where His Son would serve His mission as Messiah for all of Father's creations. I just don't believe it.

[Olavarria]

And I Saw the Stars -- The Book of Abraham and Ancient Geocentric Astronomy

Stargazer, please read my "disclaimer".

[K-2]

So you think that Abraham may have believed Sirius to be Kolob, the "first creation", even though it isn't old enough to be, because he didn't know any better?

[Olavarria]

The trouble with all that is that (1) in Egypt Sirius is the female goddess Spdt/Sothis, and there is nothing dog-like about her, (2) the Book of Abraham provides an internal etymology for Kolob which is completely unrelated to the Dog-star, but is cognate with Egyptian, and (3) claims that the BofA is geocentric are in error (see especially M. Rhodes & J. Moody, “Astronomy and the Creation in the Book of Abraham,” in Gee & Hauglid, eds., Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant, 17-36; cf. Alma 30:44, Helaman 12:15, Isaiah 40:22).

(1)Abraham wasn't Egyptian; he was a Semite.

(2)The etymology for "kolob" is open to debate, for sure. The most striking feature to me was how "Kalbu Shamash" connects the star Kalbu with the sun. Joseph, in Fac 2, connects Kolob with a depiction of the rising sun. The Sirius identification rationalizes this in my mind.

(3)Ya, I'm more impressed with DCP's paper.

Edited September 19, 2011 by Pedro A. Olavarria

[Olavarria]

So you think that Abraham may have believed Sirius to be Kolob, the "first creation", even though it isn't old enough to be, because he didn't know any better?

I make a distinction between the Book of Abraham and the facimilies. The hypocephalus(F.2) post dates Abraham by a very long time. I see the identifications as Joseph's and not Abraham's. Joseph used Fac,2 as a visual aid for the Book of Abraham astronomy so I see his explanations as an amalgamation of Egyptian and "Abrahamic" concepts. Click the links on the OP. The four ram heads on figure 1 supposedly represent "the first four generations of creation".

Edited September 19, 2011 by Pedro A. Olavarria

[Franktalk]

I don't think we should look to modern astronomy for relative ages for heavenly bodies. At least not use them for accepting or rejecting any star system for Kolob. The past configuration of the stars can be very different than our projections. So placing that aside and it's current brightest aspect can an argument be made to assign Kolob as Sirius?

It is quite the coincidence that the floods came around the same time as the brightest star. That smacks of design. And it is my understanding that Sirius is moving towards us so it appears to not move in the sky, thus a fixed location. But can that thought be extended to a completely different subject of Kolob? I sure don't know. But a fixed star (relative) could very well have more meaning than the obvious.

[Bernard Gui]

Speculation Alert! Speculation Alert!

As a firm believer in the corporeal nature of God and other resurrected beings, I have

no problem accepting a physical location for their home, be it planet or star, or even black hole. If Kolob is

located in what we call the Milky Way galaxy, then I am open to the possibility that God our Father

could be the God of this galaxy. We cannot see any individual star outside our galaxy, even

with the most powerful telescope. The distances involved between objects in the universe

are beyond comprehension, so I would not have heartburn if each galaxy were the realm

of a Father and Mother and their progeny. In fact, I even contemplate the possibility that

each solar system with inhabitable planets could be the kingdom of a God. Shoot, I'm not

embarrassed when 19th-century prophets talked about beings living in the Sun. I find it

all extremely interesting, even provocative.

If this is God's work, I want to be a part of it:

An immense stellar nursery in Orion some 1,500 light-years away. Over there is some unorganized matter.

Let's go see what we can do with it!

Here is one of the sharper views of the Sun ever taken.

http://apod.nasa.gov...d/ap110917.html

http://apod.nasa.gov...d/ap110918.html

What a trip!

Bernard

Edited September 19, 2011 by Bernard Gui

[Calm]

I have an issue with living in a black hole unless resurrected beings and black holes are significantly different from what we believe them to be.

[Bernard Gui]

I have an issue with living in a black hole unless resurrected beings and black holes are significantly different from what we believe them to be.

There are all kinds of theoretical possibilities, including time and travel, and every now and then there are surprise discoveries that change the road map. Who knows what the truth is at this point? Anyway, speculation, like advice, is free and easy to give, and free and easy to reject.

Bernard

[Calm]

There are all kinds of theoretical possibilities, including time and travel, and every now and then there are surprise discoveries that change the road map. Who knows what the truth is at this point? Anyway, speculation, like advice, is free and easy to give, and free and easy to reject.

Bernard

Which is why it is so fun.

[Robert F. Smith]

(1)Abraham wasn't Egyptian; he was a Semite.

(2)The etymology for "kolob" is open to debate, for sure. The most striking feature to me was how "Kalbu Shamash" connects the star Kalbu with the sun. Joseph, in Fac 2, connects Kolob with a depiction of the rising sun. The Sirius identification rationalizes this in my mind.

(3)Ya, I'm more impressed with DCP's paper.

Yes, but (1) you overlook the cognate Egyptian & Semitic root QLB/QRB/Q3B "near, midst," as the (2) most likely source based on the etymology given in the BofA text itself, and (3) miss the more sophisticated meaning of the text based on modern astrophysics.

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

I really think Hugh Nibley's last book "One Eternal Round" is essential reading on this topic.

[Olavarria]

Yes, but (1) you overlook the cognate Egyptian & Semitic root QLB/QRB/Q3B "near, midst," as the (2) most likely source based on the etymology given in the BofA text itself, and (3) miss the more sophisticated meaning of the text based on modern astrophysics.

(1)You make an excellent point about the text being the primary source when looking for etymologies. The truth between my etymology and your's might not be an issue of "either/or" but one of "both/and". Interestingly enough, the Arabs called Sirius Al Kalb al Jabbar. I also like the iconographical support for my argument(Fac2, fig 1).Here's more.

(2)Ditto

(3) If it fits modern astronomy then it will almost certainly not fit future astronomy. We'll agree to disagree:)

Edited September 20, 2011 by Pedro A. Olavarria

[CV75]

as you narrow this down, we'll spare the puns while you pare the suns...

[Olavarria]

Bump

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

Robert Smith's first post in this thread said everything I would have, only with much better documentation than I would have had the patience to muster. At any rate, everyone should read Hamlet's Mill by MIT Profs Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha von Dechend if they haven't yet, particularly the "Intermezzo." Kevin Christensen, as referenced above, also has a really useful paper New Wine and New Bottles: Scriptural Scholarship as Sacrament which we should be expanding and building upon.

Edited April 8, 2012 by JeremyOrbe-Smith

[Darth_Bill]

>We cannot see any individual star outside our galaxy, even

with the most powerful telescope.

Huh? When that latest supernova went off, in a different galaxy, they looked at old pics and announced...it was that one. I'm pretty sure we can resolve individual stars in different galaxies. They have to be absolutely huge, but I think we can. I'm open to the possibility of being wrong, but I know I chuckled when they figured out which one went poof.

http://blogs.discove...ogenitor-found/

The article provides links to other stars from other supernova being found. Soooooo, it looks like we can see stars in other galaxies, and even ones that blow up.

Edited April 8, 2012 by Darth_Bill

[Kevin Christensen]

Amazing to see that a few people have read and remember my Dialogue article. Last year I was invited by a Pittsburgh Stake Adult Singles group to present on Kolob, which was a lot of fun. It was Nibley's long 1980 paper on The Facsimilies of the Book of Abraham that pointed out the Qalb/Kolob relation, and led me to read Hamlet's Mill myself.

"...the determinative sign for 'heart' often figures as the plumb line coming from a well-known astronomical

surveying device. the merkhet [Lit. the "informer,"] that which causes to know!. Evidently 'heart' is same thing

very specific, as it were the 'center of gravity.' And this may lead in quite another direction.

The Arabs preserved a name far Canopus--besides calling the star Kalb at-teiman ('heart of the south'):

Suhail el wetn, 'Canopus Ponderosus, the heavy-weighting Canopus," i.e.,

"Canopus was the weight at the end of the plumb-line...(p. 73) by means of which this depth

[of the universe] was measured." (p.271)

Of all the stars it alone was taken for static, exempted from the Precession" (p. 269, N. 16).

Hence it is "the primordial star. 'presented under the form of an Egg that contained all the things that were

to be born...caIled 'l'etoile immobile'. It is near the Great Cloud which marks the South Pole of the ecliptic,

and is NOT to be sought in the North." (p.269)

Besides the name, I love the notion of Canopus as exempt from the Precession, and therefore, as dominating the motion of all other stars as imagined in a geocentric cosmos that suggests how apt the idea for illustrating the message of a hierarchy of intelligences in the Book of Abraham. It's also one of the reasons that I can't get excited about the Papryrus by themselves.

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

[Stargazer]

I really dislike this subject. Why should Sirius be Kolob? Kolob doesn't even have to be in the Milky Way galaxy! There's no evidence, not any, that Sirius = Kolob.

If you want to start playing word games, there are probably any number of other stars whose names vaguely resemble Kolob.

Sirius is an high metal stellar class A star, and is less than 1 billion years old. It's total lifetime on the main sequence will only be about a billion years, at which time it will go through red giant and eventually white dwarf phases. It is still quite young. If it were Kolob, HF would have only very recently transferred His "flag" to there from some other star -- because 2 billion years ago Sirius did not exist.

The idea that Kolob has to be a nearby star is the locational equivalent of presentism. Call it localism.

[Olavarria]

Amazing to see that a few people have read and remember my Dialogue article. Last year I was invited by a Pittsburgh Stake Adult Singles group to present on Kolob, which was a lot of fun. It was Nibley's long 1980 paper on The Facsimilies of the Book of Abraham that pointed out the Qalb/Kolob relation, and led me to read Hamlet's Mill myself.

"...the determinative sign for 'heart' often figures as the plumb line coming from a well-known astronomical

surveying device. the merkhet [Lit. the "informer,"] that which causes to know!. Evidently 'heart' is same thing

very specific, as it were the 'center of gravity.' And this may lead in quite another direction.

The Arabs preserved a name far Canopus--besides calling the star Kalb at-teiman ('heart of the south'):

Suhail el wetn, 'Canopus Ponderosus, the heavy-weighting Canopus," i.e.,

"Canopus was the weight at the end of the plumb-line...(p. 73) by means of which this depth

[of the universe] was measured." (p.271)

Of all the stars it alone was taken for static, exempted from the Precession" (p. 269, N. 16).

Hence it is "the primordial star. 'presented under the form of an Egg that contained all the things that were

to be born...caIled 'l'etoile immobile'. It is near the Great Cloud which marks the South Pole of the ecliptic,

and is NOT to be sought in the North." (p.269)

Besides the name, I love the notion of Canopus as exempt from the Precession, and therefore, as dominating the motion of all other stars as imagined in a geocentric cosmos that suggests how apt the idea for illustrating the message of a hierarchy of intelligences in the Book of Abraham. It's also one of the reasons that I can't get excited about the Papryrus by themselves.

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

I shall read your paper, kind sir.

[Log]

So, what, the pun to be avoided was Kolob as the God Star?

[Robert F. Smith]

As an amateur astronomer I don't think there's any chance that Kolob has anything to do with Sirius. It makes no sense at all. When God told Abraham about Kolob, Abraham was free to conceive any star he could see might be the indicated celestial body, and since Sirius has a certain prominence, it wouldn't be at all surprising for him to think that Kolob and Sirius were one in the same.

HOWEVER, it does not matter whether Abraham or anyone else thought or thinks that Sirius is somehow involved with regulating or ruling over any other stars in the heavens. What anyone thinks is not at all authoritative. First of all, and in my opinion this is the most important consideration, Sirius is by no means old enough to be considerable as a regulating body. It is a very hot star of spectral type A, twice the mass of our sun, and is only about 250 million years old. It's about halfway through its expected lifespan on the main sequence It is accompanied by a white dwarf companion, forming a double-star system; the white dwarf is the remnant of a much larger star of originally 5 solar masses and is believed to have basically burned itself out about 120 million years ago. They apparently formed together. Our sun is presently 5 billion years old, and the Universe itself is about 14 billion years old. How can anyone imagine that a pair of stars that ignited such a long time after the Big Bang, AND is expected to burn out in merely another 250-500,000 years, is going to be regulating anything? If it is regulating anything, and short-lived stars like that are being used a Celestial HQs, then God has to be transferring the flag awfully darned frequently.

There is no possible way Sirius could be Kolob. Kolob doesn't even have to be in this Galaxy, for goodness sake.

All that being said, however, it would make a certain amount of sense for God placing his Celestial HQ very close to the place where His Son would serve His mission as Messiah for all of Father's creations. I just don't believe it.

I really dislike this subject. Why should Sirius be Kolob? Kolob doesn't even have to be in the Milky Way galaxy! There's no evidence, not any, that Sirius = Kolob.

If you want to start playing word games, there are probably any number of other stars whose names vaguely resemble Kolob.

Sirius is an high metal stellar class A star, and is less than 1 billion years old. It's total lifetime on the main sequence will only be about a billion years, at which time it will go through red giant and eventually white dwarf phases. It is still quite young. If it were Kolob, HF would have only very recently transferred His "flag" to there from some other star -- because 2 billion years ago Sirius did not exist.

The idea that Kolob has to be a nearby star is the locational equivalent of presentism. Call it localism.

The age of some particular galaxy, star, or stellar system seems to me to be irrelevant in a multiverse or pluriverse in which gods come into their own and begin to rule their own expanding domain -- while continuing to carry on a close relationship with their father and brother gods, worlds without end.

Last Sunday in HP group, someone repeated Dr. Russell M. Nelson's argument this Conference that (a repeat of a Nov 2011 statement he had made) life is not a result of chance or the result of the Big Bang, i.e., an argument for Intelligent Design. As though he had called into question the astrophysical theory of the Big Bang, which is a matter of consensus within science, and something which Apostle Nelson did not deny.

Edited April 10, 2012 by Robert F. Smith

[JKimball]

Olavarria, this is the first time I have visited this board. I found your previous thread on this subject after googling "Sirius Kolob" to see if anyone out there had made this connection. The question arose in my mind after reading an interesting article about the religious significance of Sirius in human history. You can read it here: http://vigilantcitizen.com/hidden-knowledge/connection-between-sirius-and-human-history/

So for me, coming to this question from a very different angle, I was quite surprised to find the linguistic connections that you identify. I think it is a very interesting possiblitiy. And I suppose, if the author of the article I read was correct, many of the ancient and modern mystery religions would quite naturally assume that Kolob was Sirius if they read the BoA.