Daniel and the Polar Configuration

There are a number of scriptural stories that are clearly Saturnian in nature. That is, knowing the myths and traditions spawned by the Polar Configuration of planets in antiquity allows us to recognize when the prophets used that same imagery in their accounts. Indeed, we find indications that most of the prophets, if not all, were shown the appearance of the planets in Earth’s ancient heavens. Their response to what they saw in vision was uniformly enthusiastic.

The first example is that cited in "Kolob, the God Star," analyzing the Pearl of Great Price, and more specifically the vision in Abraham. The polar configuration was the primary feature of his vision. This appears to be the case in the Old Testament book of Daniel as well.

Nebuchadnezzar’s dream

In Daniel, chapter 2, we find that King Nebuchadneaazar has a dream that leaves him “troubled.” While he cannot remember the dream, he is certain that if one of his sages can refresh his memory, that same person will certainly know the interpretation of the dream.

The wise men (Chaldeans) were at a loss. They had no idea what the king had dreamed, much less the interpretation thereof. What is more, they asserted that no one should be expected to know the dreams of another. When the king heard this, he became furious. He threatened to kill them all.

At this point in the narrative, the wise men seek out Daniel, who appeals to the king for more time to divine the dream and its meaning.

We pickup the account in verse 19.

Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven.

Daniel answered and said, blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his:

And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding:
He revealeth the deep and secret things: he knoweth what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with him.

I think thee, and praise thee, O thou God of my fathers, who hast given me wisdom and might, and hast made known unto me now what we desired of thee: for thou hast now made known unto us the king’s matter. (Daniel 2:19-23.)

The prophet’s common vision

Daniel’s enthusiasm comes from more than simply learning in vision of the king’s dream. His euphoria likely stems from the fact that he was shown the Polar Configuration in vision and recognized it as the source of all religious tradition. The evidence of this is in Daniel’s words to King Nebuchadnezzar, as we shall see shortly.

Note Daniel’s reference to the change of times and seasons in the above verses. One of the most profound differences between the world at Daniel’s time (our time as well, in fact) and the Patriarchal Age was the radical change in the heavens and the earth. The contrast between the two ages was so dramatic that the Apostle Peter was later to write “the old world that then was … perished.” (2 Peter 3:5.)

This radical change necessitated a whole new way of calculating the day of the year and the time of day. While in the heavens, Saturn and its appendages were the equivalent of a celestial clock and calendar. Instead of looking at one’s watch, as we do today, the ancients had only to glance at the heavens in order to determine the time of day. Many ancient monuments were constructed after the collapse of the polar column in order to record the passage of time, using the periodicity of the new heavens, yet employing the symbolism of the old Saturnian system. Stonehenge, for example was both a celestial observatory and a circular calendar. And because it preserved the time keeping elements of the ancient Saturnian system, it was also a sacred place, fit for rites and rituals — a temple, in other words — connected with both the old and the new heavens.

Hence, the ongoing debate about whether sacred compounds like Stonehenge are calendars to mark the passage of time, observatories to track the motion of the sun, moon and stars, or sacred compounds for religious rites and rituals is truly futile. Such sacred sites served as all three at once! (Notably, modern temples serve these same three functions.) Indeed, the very layout of modern timepieces reflects the circular arrangement of the ancient Saturnian system, as do monuments such as Stonehenge.

Seasons, as we know them, were nonexistent in the Saturnian Age. When seasons began, after the polar configuration seemingly exited the heavens, the calendar became a vital necessity for tracking the seasons and marking the passage of time. Thus, it was natural and proper for Daniel to attribute the change of the “time and the seasons” to God and the vision he had just seen.

Saturnian traditions revealed in a dream

Daniel ultimately reveals to the king a rather interesting narrative that bears scrutiny in light of what we know about ancient Saturn and the Polar Configuration of planets.

Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee and the form thereof was terrible.

This image’s head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,

His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay. (Daniel 2:31-33.)

This description matches the appearance of the Polar Configuration during the phase that gave rise to the celestial, heaven man, angel or god standing upon the Earth and answers to the archetypal symbol of Saturn’s crescent as outstretched arms, Venus in the center of Saturn as the head, Mars at the top of the polar column as the chest or heart, and the column itself as the belly and lower limbs.


Here we see an Egyptian version of this image.


This is the Babylonian version of the same astral image.


This is an artist rendition of how it appeared above the Earth in the ancient heavens.


This is the same image that the apostle John declared to be an angel of God. It is also likely that this is the image that is referred to in Doctrine and Covenants, Section 133, verse 18 wherein the Lord is made to “stand upon the mount of Olivet and upon the mighty ocean, even the great deep, and upon the islands of the sea, and upon the land of Zion,” a remarkable feat for a man (even a resurrected god), but an accurate description of the ‘heaven man’ image. (Incidentally, this speaks volumes about events that will be seen to occur in the last days as described in this remarkable revelation to Joseph Smith.)

Note that each segment of the great image described by Daniel was said to be of certain elements: head of gold, beast and arms of silver, belly and thighs of brass, legs of iron and feet of iron and clay. This is clearly an indication of the appearance, brightness and color of each element of the Polar Configuration that gave rise to the ‘heaven man’ image.

The brightness of this apparition was said to be “excellent,” and its form “terrible.” All the elements of the Polar Configuration were in this specific alignment or arrangement at only one time during a 24-hour period: at the time we call midnight. At the point in the day/night cycle, the entire configuration became astonishingly bright, much like today’s moon rising in a blackened sky at midnight.

The celestial stone

But there is yet more to the king’s vision as described by Daniel.

Thou sawest til that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them in pieces.

Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth. (Daniel 2:34-35.)

These verses describe the metamorphosis of the heaven man image. While it is unlikely that this event saw the dissolution of the Polar Configuration, which event came much later in its career, this was a notable state in the long evolution of that peculiar arrangement of planets. Ultimately, at the end of the Saturn epoch, Saturn and its satellites did vanish into the darkness of space, “that no place was found for them.” Therefore, the statement is correct, but not chronological. In the meantime, the configuration continued to evolve into many other forms before its final dismemberment. Evidence of the continued evolution is in the narrative itself, as we shall see.

The stone that “was cut out without hands” was Mars. In the early stages of the ancient configuration of planets, Mars appeared to be in the center of Venus, which appeared to be in the center of Saturn. It had remained stationary relative to the other visible planets while Venus underwent many dramatic changes before returning to a more stable position. (See "The Saturn Epic: In the Beginning.")

Now it was Mars’ turn to become unstable. Mars exited its apparent position in the center of Venus and began to ‘wander’ or ‘descend’ without any apparent outside intervention. Thus, it was said to have been “cut out without hands.”

As Mars appeared to descend, it seemed to grow larger because it was, in fact, moving toward the Earth along the shared axis of rotation. Thus it seemed to ‘descend’ and ‘grow’ at the same time. By the time Mars reached the position shown in Figure 1, the ‘pillar’ or ‘mountain’ appeared between Earth’s northern horizon and the approaching Mars. Thus, in Daniel’s depiction, the “stone” became a “great mountain.”

The plasma stretching between Earth and Mars, Daniel’s “mountain,” now appeared to form a skirt about the legs of the heavenly apparition, while Mars was seen as the torso. The crescent on Saturn formed the outstretched arms of the figure with Venus as the head. (See the above illustrations.)

The plasma in the pillar (skirt/mountain) must have been spectacularly bright and colorful, as pictures from the Hubble telescope have shown in other such plasma structures in our galaxy. Thus, earthly spectators assigned the colors of various metals to the “image” to describe its wondrous appearance. Daniel’s account merely repeats those cultural traditions of the colorful image.

But, as Mars continued its descent and growth, the mountain appeared to collapse and the grouping seemed to come apart. Thus, in Daniel’s account the stone “smote the image upon his feet, that were of iron and clay, and brake them in pieces.”

Mars continued its apparent descent as it approached Earth along the common axis of rotation until both the polar column and Mars appeared to be a literal appendage or “mountain” on Earth’s northernmost horizon. Or, as Daniel told it, “… the stone … became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.”

As Mars and the polar column approached most closely to the Earth, the ground beneath the feet of onlookers began to quake, furthering the impression that an impact of some kind had take place. Hence, they had the idea that the stone “smote” the image. Darkness shrouded the Earth and the great cities fell, lending yet more weight to the idea that the image had been destroyed as well.

When the darkness dissipated after an indeterminate length of time, Earth’s inhabitants saw the polar configuration once again. However, Mars had begun to withdraw from its former proximity to the Earth. A new phase of the Saturnian configuration had begun.

The interpretation

Of course, Daniel gave an interpretation of the dream.

This is the dream, and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.
Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.

And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beast of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold. (Daniel 2:36-38.)

In antiquity, the role of the monarch was clearly defined by Saturn traditions. He was god’s agent on earth, the successor to the original, celestial monarch, Saturn. Any interpretation of dreams that involved that heavenly prototype of all earthly kings would, by necessity, follow that concept. Daniel indulges in neither flattery, as some have suggested, nor exaggeration to ingratiate himself to the king by referring to Nebuchadnezzar as the gold head. He was merely articulating cultural tradition.

Daniel follows that pronouncement with an explanation that each of the other parts of the image represents four subsequent kingdoms, each inferior to the one that immediately precedes it. Apparently, the idea that the whole of civilization is deteriorating is not new to our time. Representing mankind in a long, downward spiral, except where God intervenes through his prophets, is the entire message of the scriptures.

“… on earth as it is in heaven.”

Note that this is an instance of how one time celestial objects were employed to give order and meaning to earthly events and conditions. It is an example of imposing the heavenly order of things on the earthly, a commonly used device in antiquity.

And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. (Daniel 2:44.)

The analogy of earthly kings and kingdoms is made complete in Daniel’s exposition. It is the kingdom of God that, like the celestial stone, shall roll forth and consume all others.

Here we see the power of analogy at work. The evolving Polar Configuration is made to depict the world and the kingdom of God. As the prophets attempted to convert the ‘pagans,’ they were forced to use the religious traditions of those same people to teach gospel principles. What better way to change hearts and minds than to put a unique twist on that which is familiar and comfortable to your audience?

“If it works, use it,” seems to be the rule. This can be seen in the teachings of virtually every prophet, including the Savior’s use of parables. It is why most of the scriptures, the gospel, temple ritual and temple iconography has pagan roots. It was the pagans, with their obvious Saturn traditions, that the prophets were sent to convert.

Of course, there is inherent danger in this practice: Later generations might mistake the symbols and imagery used as teaching tools for the real thing. Additionally, converts may retain their beliefs in pagan traditions even after converting to the gospel. This is the drawback or downside to using symbolism at all, from whatever source.

Joseph Smith emphasized the validity of the meaning of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. He let Daniel’s interpretation stand, adding only that the church he founded was the beginning of the kingdom that would consume all others seen in Daniel’s vision. All the brethren since Joseph have taught this same thing.

More dream symbolism

In chapter 4, the king has another dream with a new set of symbols.

Thus were the vision of mine head in my bed; I saw, and behold a tree in the midst of the earth, and the height thereof was great.

The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the end of all the earth:

The leaves thereof were fair, and the fruit thereof much, and in it was meat for all: the beasts of the field had shadow under it, and the fowls of the heaven dwelt in the boughs thereof, and all flesh was fed of it. (Daniel 4: 10-12.)

The heavenly tree was only another expression of the polar configuration, the pillar being the trunk of the tree and its branches being the crescent in an inverted position from that of the heaven man.

This was the appearance of the polar configuration at midday in the ancient, day/night cycle.


Though we do not readily recognize it as such, it was the principal symbol for an ancient cult that worshipped trees or worshipped in groves. The Israelite prophets called it Asherah (Ashtoreth), and they condemned its worship. (See "Temple Symbols and Christmas.")

Still more symbolism

Yet another dream in chapter 7 introduces us to yet another set of symbols. These are four beasts. Notice the remarkable similarity between these beasts and those listed in Ezekiel 1:10 and Revelation 4:6,7. It seems clear that the ancients frequently associated beasts with several aspects of the Saturn configuration.

There is a clear difference between Daniel’s beasts and those of Ezekiel and Revelation. It appears that the visions in Ezekiel and Revelation deal with the daily cycle of the Polar Configuration with each of the four beasts representing the four primary points of the compass. These originate in the four principle positions of Saturn’s rotating crescent in a 24-hour period—midnight, morning, midday, and evening. Coincidentally, Joseph Smith’s interpretation of the four beasts he found on the Egyptian papyri is the same: These four beasts represent the four cardinal points of the compass. The vision of Daniel deals with four primary stages during the evolution of the Saturnian configuration of planets. Hence, it’s use of the symbolic number four, personified in the four beasts. (See "The Eagle, the Bull, the Lion and the Man.")

A multitude of traditions

Thus we see that understanding the early history of our planet and its unique heavenly manifestations is vital to understanding the prophets because they taught the lessons of the gospel with traditions and stories — myths, if you will — that originated in the Saturnian congregation of planets as they metamorphosed over time as well as the plasma constructs that emerged between planets. These archetypes evolved into a multitude of icons and images in every ancient culture, becoming the basis for legends of epic dimensions.

The lesson to be learned here is that we should not mistake imagery for reality. We would do well to use our newfound knowledge to enhance our understanding by separating the planetary traditions from the lessons they were designed to teach.

© Anthony E. Larson, 2000

Kolob, the God Star

Every Latter-day Saint has read about Kolob in Abraham from the Pearl of Great Price. Many have speculated about it; most have given it little thought. Kolob’s possible location and identity in our universe seems to be the primary focus of such speculation. A careful review of this bit of revealed knowledge in light of the Saturn traditions may prove informative.

In chapter 3 of Abraham, it appears that God reveals to Abraham information about a star named Kolob that is physically located nearest to where he, the Lord, actually resides in the universe. An amplified explanation of Kolob can be found on page 37, opposite facsimile no. 2, the Egyptian hypocephalus Joseph Smith found among the papyri that came into his hands.

A new reading

The first thing we see upon reading Joseph’s explanation is that some of these terms are authentic Egyptian. This should not be surprising since he gleaned this information from an Egyptian document. The question is: Where did he learn these ancient Egyptian terms? For example, Joseph names one figure Hah-ko-kau-beam (Pearl of Great Price, Fig. 5, p. 37.)

It is reasonable to assume, given his lack of formal training in the Egyptian language, that he first heard the word spoken during a revelation. His rendering of the name is clearly an attempt to write it phonetically (something any of us might be forced to do when attempting to write a word from a foreign language we had only heard spoken), since the hyphenation does not conform to the way the Semitic word is actually written. A more proper hyphenation of the word would have been: Ha-kokab-im. The Egyptian kakab is the word for ‘star.’ Typically written in consonants, without vowels, it is rendered: KKB. Modern scholars choose the vowel sounds that are implied by their use in equivalent words in related modern languages. In effect, they make an educated guess as to the vowel sounds. Thus, Joseph’s kokab (or kokob as it is in Abraham) may be more accurate than the scholarly version, kakab. The preceding ha is a determinative, meaning ‘the,’ and im is a plural ending, the equivalent of the letter ‘s’ in English. Thus, Joseph Smith correctly wrote, albeit phonetically, the Egyptian words ‘ha kokab im,’ meaning ‘the stars.’

As with Kakab, so with Kolob

Kolob continues this pattern. Written KLB, it is clearly closely related in meaning to KKB, kokab. So, Kolob has ‘star’ as part of its meaning, but Nibley and others assert that it is closer in meaning to the Arabic word qalb, meaning ‘heart.’ Additionally, the Arabic-speaking peoples routinely use qalb as part of star names: qalb al-asad for Regulus, for example. The verb form of the word also means to turn upside down, to turn over and over. (This will become more meaningful in a moment.) The Egyptians thought of Canopus as the premier heart-star. Indeed, Egyptians conceived of their creator/king or sun god as having two hearts — the hat-heart was female, Tefnut, and the ab-heart was male, Shu — one within the other, although translators rarely concern themselves with the distinction. Also, Horus was said to be ab en hat, heart of the heart. It is likely that the use of ab in those words is the reason why scholars also point to ‘heart’ as one meaning of kolob and kakab.

Ironically, Shu is also the one “who sits in the midst of the Eye which is the seat of his Father.” Thus, the eye and the heart of the sun god, Re, are virtually synonymous in Egyptian lore, an unexpected and curious association from a modern perspective.

Looking through the Saturn myths

When all this is considered in light of Talbott’s Saturn thesis, we see that Kolob may be simply another Egyptian name for the Saturn/Venus/Mars assemblage of planets during Earth’s earliest epoch.



Re/Atum is Saturn. He is the father-god, the fixed, immovable sun god. His hat-heart is Venus, the female goddess who is everywhere in ancient mythology identified as the “eye goddess.” The ab-heart is Mars, the male warrior/hero/child who resides in his father’s eye, the ‘apple’ of his father’s eye.



The entire polar configuration was seen to rotate once every 24 hours. Hence, the verb form of qalb, meaning “to turn over and over” is most appropriate. Additionally, the Latin Venus was called Verticordia, the turning or whirling heart.



In fine, Joseph’s declaration that Hah-ko-kau-beam (ha-kokab-im) are stars was accurate. The etymological connection between kokab and Kolob indicates that both have the meaning ‘star.’ Kolob also has the additional meaning of ‘heart,’ as in the Arabic qalb, an otherwise odd association with the word ‘star,’ except in the context of the Saturn myth and the Polar Configuration.

Kolob is found

Turning now to Joseph Smith, we can see that what he described and explained in the Pearl of Great Price matches the Egyptian traditions and the Saturn myth.

Joseph’s explanation of Kolob as “First in government, the last pertaining to the measurement of time,” fits Saturn’s ancient role. It was perceived as the primary governing power in the heavens. Everything else appeared to move or revolve around it. While it appeared to fully rotate once daily, it also remained in a fixed heavenly station. Additionally, it was the timepiece par excellence. In the role of Kronos (Cronus), Saturn’s appearance was commensurate with the beginning of time. That is, the ancients had no way of telling time or differentiating night from day until they could see Saturn and its rotating crescent.

What is more exciting is that a reading of Abraham, chapter 3, from the standpoint of Talbott’s polar configuration of planets reveals what was, undoubtedly, the fundamental meaning of the Lord’s explanation. He used Semitic words because that is the language Abraham spoke. He described the original planetary configuration that existed before the Flood because it served to teach Abraham the core truth behind traditional beliefs and practices, as well as provide a teaching tool for spiritual truths, which he expounds later in this same chapter.

Abraham sees the Polar Configuration

In verse 2, we learn that Abraham saw “very great” stars near the throne of God. Ancient Saturn was perceived as the throne of god, if not god himself, in the eyes of the ancients. The other planets, Venus, Mars and the 7 small moons that were seen to orbit Saturn, were called stars. They were the “governing ones” that dominated Earth’s ancient heavens. The name Kolob may well apply, in this account, to Saturn itself because it is referred to as the “one to govern all those which belong to the same order as that upon which thou standest.” Saturn was the apparent ‘anchor’ or ‘governor’ of all the heavenly host in antiquity, including the Earth.

The issue of night and day was very different under those ancient skies. The light that ruled the day was the same light that ruled the night: Saturn. In the period of time we would call day, Saturn was very subdued in appearance, washed out, if you will, by the brightness of sunlight. However, when the sun set, it grew brighter until, at the time of day we would call midnight, it was at its brightest. So when the Lord relates to Abraham that “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,” he is only reiterating what he already declared in verse 3, except that this time he calls this orb a “planet” instead of “star.” He was simply being more accurate in his description.

Indeed, the Lord’s description to Abraham of one planet standing above another until one comes to Kolob answers to the illustration drawn by Joseph Smith, and published by Philo Dibble, of the Earth’s antediluvian state, much better than it answers to the present arrangement of planets moving in distant orbits. (See Volume III of The Prophecy Trilogy, page 119, for this illustration.) Furthermore, it accurately answers to the Polar Configuration of Planets as envisioned by Talbott. (Watch the video here.)

A new, clearer perspective

So we see that what was revealed to Abraham was quite different from what most Latter-day Saints believe, yet it serves to further substantiate this author’s thesis that the Polar Configuration, as Talbott explains it, was the actual state of the heavens in antiquity, and that understanding that fact illuminates the scriptures as nothing else.

The word Kolob is a construct of the Egyptian religion, based on the ancient heavens and not a present physical reality. What God revealed to Abraham was actually the order of the planets during the earliest epoch in our solar system, the Patriarchal Age, the time before the Flood known to Egyptians as Tep Zepi, or Golden Age, when our world and the heavens above it were vastly different than they are today. Both Abraham and Joseph Smith used Egyptian terms to describe the images they saw — Abraham saw it in vision, Joseph saw it on the papyri.

It should be gratifying to Latter-day Saints that modern research into Egyptian traditions, myth and legend has given credibility to the teachings and writings of this dispensation’s founding prophet and aided us tremendously in our efforts to comprehend scripture.

© Anthony E. Larson, 2001

Saturn Symbolism in the Salt Lake Temple (Part 1)

The purpose of the numerous icons and images incorporated in the architecture of the Salt Lake Temple is largely a mystery to modern Mormon scholars — a mystery that they unanimously acknowledge.

Every published effort to explain the meaning and purpose of such symbolism, typical in early temple architecture, is limited to unbridled speculation on the authors’ part as to the possible meaning of this symbol or that. Yet, few of their notions leave the reader satisfied or better informed. Such scholarly efforts fall far short of their stated expository goal, excusing their failure by bemoaning the fact that no early LDS prophet, authority or architect ever bothered to explain the symbols they employed.

Scholarly ignorance

All the verbal shoulder shrugging done by LDS scholars when it comes to modern temple symbology is very telling, indeed. It means a vital part of their gospel training has been woefully neglected. If they had taken the time and made the effort to understand Joseph Smith’s view of ancient history, the symbols would be full of meaning for them.

Ironically, from this author’s point of view, the gospel, the scriptures and the teachings of modern prophets provide ample explanation if seen in the proper perspective and context. Early church authorities made no comment on temple symbology because it dealt with sacred themes. Also, they felt no comment was needed; explanation is unnecessary for the properly initiated. The answer is there for all to see; yet modern Saints fail to see it because they fail to understand what they have been taught.

The temple as a parable

Like scriptural parables, the meaning of temple iconography is denied to those who fail to study the gospel in depth. To most, the symbols simply appear to be decorative, indicative of nothing important. While anyone can perceive the meaning of parables and symbols on a superficial level (as every scholarly effort in that vein proves), there is a more profound message for those who care to look more closely.

In order to understand the iconography of the temples he inspired, one must understand Joseph Smith’s view of history and the heavens. (After all, the symbols are drawn from astral bodies and phenomenon.) From a few, key statements made by the prophet and his closest confidants, together with the acknowledgment that he held a cosmological view of Earth’s past and future that differs significantly from today’s mainstream views, one can begin to understand the elements he employed in temple architecture. As long as LDS scholars and church members fail to give credence to the catastrophic history of planet Earth, as long as they fail to connect that history with scriptural events and imagery, as long as they fail to grasp Joseph Smith’s view of the ancient cosmos, the iconography of the Salt Lake Temple will remain a mystery to them.

The Freemason connection

Most scholarly expositions on LDS temple iconography are largely vacuous discussions of how the symbols were likely borrowed from the Masons by early church leaders who dabbled in Masonry, including the Prophet Joseph Smith himself. This type of apologist drivel casts the church and its founder in an indefensible position: The Prophet is made to look like a plagiarist and LDS temple iconography and ceremony made to be borrowed, ‘used goods.’ Neither is true.

What Mormon and Masonic temples have in common stems only from a common origin, the very things they share with ancient temples and religious architecture the world over. Both Masonry and Mormonism arose in the Anglo-Saxon culture (Masonry in 13th century Europe, Mormonism in 19th century America), hence it was wise on Joseph’s part to employ many similarities so that the temple would seem, at least, somewhat culturally familiar to 19th century Americans. While Joseph adapted elements familiar to the culture he lived in, he could have just as easily employed elements from Egyptian, Mayan, Celtic, Oriental or Nordic traditions. However, that would have made the temple seem totally foreign to most newly converted Mormons.

The astral connection

Among LDS scholars, Nibley alone makes the point that modern temple iconography shares that of ancient temples. Indeed, the title of his book tells the story: Temple and Cosmos. While he clearly sees that temple architecture and symbolism, ancient and modern, reflected astronomical values, Nibley fails to make the vital connection to Saturnian traditions, to the appearance of the ancient heavens as opposed to our modern heavens. Yet, that is the final key to interpreting all temple architecture and iconography. From Stonehenge to Tiahuanaco, to Angkor Thom, to the Parthenon, to the pyramids on the Geza plateau and the enigmatic Sphinx, to Teotiuacan and Chichen Itza, to the Nauvoo temple and the Salt Lake Temple, they all share one commonality: They were designed and adorned to reflect the appearance of the heavens, both ancient and modern.

Temple symbolism, ancient and modern

The symbols employed on Mormon temples share a common origin with the symbolism employed in ancient temples the world over. No matter the culture, no matter the structure, they were all erected to memorialize (remember or reconstruct) the realities in Earth’s ancient heavens as much as the heavens we have now. Additionally, temples have always incorporated features of the current arrangement of the heavens when the temple was built as well. In that regard, temples are an amalgam of the ancient heavens and the present heavens. This Nibley reiterates time and again.

Failure to acknowledge, as the Apostle Peter taught, that “the world that then was ... perished” (2 Peter 3:6) and “the heavens and the earth, which are now” (2 Peter 3:7) are vastly different from the originals has created endless confusion in the sciences and in our understanding of scripture and temple iconography.

Astral temples

Scholars readily acknowledge the astral or cosmic connections in ancient temples. Alignments with the equinox, solstices, constellations, the Sun, Moon, Venus, Mars and other celestial objects are the subjects of endless discussion. Yet, these same scholars utterly fail to recognize that the gods and goddesses, dragons, demons and devils memorialized in those temples were originally astral, based on something actually seen in the heavens anciently. Once one accepts the premise that imposing, impressive planets were the original powers that once dominated Earth’s heavens, that their motions, metamorphoses and interactions gave rise to all ancient myth and symbolism, then the rest falls into place automatically.

Modern temples are no exception to this rule. Latter-day Saints readily acknowledge the astral connections of most symbols employed in the Salt Lake Temple (that would be hard to deny), yet they utterly fail to recognize their connection to the same symbolism used in scriptural rhetoric and in ancient architecture. Indeed, uninformed, modern eyes take most of the symbolic iconography to be nothing more than stylistic decorations.

The mysterious Saturnstones

All Latter-day Saints are acquainted with the most familiar icons of the Salt Lake Temple. There are Sunstones, Moonstones, Earthstones and Starstones. What most Saints do not know is that the original architectural drawings by Truman O. Angell, temple architect, called for Saturnstones, a depiction of a planet with two rings around it, located at the top of the buttresses, above the Sunstones, on the long south wall of the temple.





Note that there is no such symbol on the Salt Lake Temple as it was finally erected, as we see it today. Instead, a repeated symbol (called a ‘frieze’ in architecture) of a circle with a ring around it was inaugurated to replace the original icon.



This circle frieze, as depicted here, can be seen on the parapet stringcourse, immediately below the three towers at each end of the temple, and is still referred to as the Saturnstones.



This symbol, too, is in accord with ancient iconography. It is the basic symbol for the Saturnian configuration, and is related to the Eye of God symbol.



Apparently, a decision was made to eliminate the Saturn icon sometime between the creation of the original plans for the temple and its final construction. No reason was ever given, and LDS scholars are at a loss to explain why the change was made. But it is this author’s contention that using a Saturn symbol was making too plain a truth that the church was not willing to explain openly.

As noted elsewhere by this author, the truth of Saturn’s dominance in Earth’s ancient heavens was the great, sacred secret of antiquity. It was told only in the most sacred precincts of ancient ritual centers. While the outward symbolism of ancient architecture, symbology and ritual endlessly reiterated the truths of Earth’s ancient skies, the names or titles used publicly to designate these icons or deities did not directly connect them to the actual planets themselves. This was withheld, saved for more sacred moments. It is for this same reason, for example, that the sacred name of God (eeeeaaaahoooowaaayeeee) was spoken only in the Holy of Holies in ancient Israelite temples, yet the name Yahweh was commonly known, used in names and expletives.

One can only speculate that, in like manner, Brigham Young, who was intimately involved in every detail of the Salt Lake Temple’s conception and construction, had learned of Saturn’s true role in Earth’s past from Joseph Smith. While Brigham’s initial inclination, likely, was to display that truth iconographically on the walls of the temple, a change of heart led him to alter the symbolic scheme. He may have felt that this truth was too much for Saints and Gentiles alike. If so, he was true to the pattern of secrecy set down by every other temple-building culture in history.

Location, location, location

It is striking that an icon of the planet Saturn should have occupied the highest point on the buttresses.



Again, scholars seem puzzled by its presence and location, wondering why Saturn was selected since there is apparently nothing in Mormon theology that would designate the planet worthy of elevated positioning on a modern temple.

One scholar stumbled on the truth when he noted that Saturn may have been selected to represent Kolob since it was the most noteworthy planet in the solar system, making it a symbolic match for the “great” star written of by Abraham. Ironically, the scholar was closer than he knew. As explained elsewhere by this author, Kolob was one of many Egyptian designations of the ancient Saturnian configuration of planets. For that reason the Saturnstones were properly included in the iconography of a latter-day temple, located above all the other icons at the highest point on the wall because Saturn once stood above all other planets or stars.

Looking north

Also noteworthy is the fact that the original drawings depicted the Saturnstones only on the south wall of the temple, not on the north, east or west walls. In this, the temple’s designers were true to the ancient order of things.



In antiquity, when Saturn dominated earthly skies, one could only see Saturn when facing north; facing south would have put Saturn behind the observer. Hence, a depiction of Saturn on a modern temple should properly be located only on a south-facing wall, so that it is only seen when facing the south side of the temple, where the viewer is looking northward, as he would have done to see Saturn in antiquity. Thus, the location of the symbol properly orients the observer northward. It would be, therefore, completely inappropriate to depict Saturn on an east, west or north-facing wall.

More pointer stars

This brings us to the depiction of Ursa Major or the Big Dipper high on the west wall of the temple.



These stars are depicted there, again, to point the eye of the viewer to the north, the location of Saturn in antiquity.

The temple’s designers wished, again, to properly orient the viewer. As one stands looking up at the temple’s west wall, he or she is facing east with the north to his left. The stars forming the Big Dipper are arranged on the temple, as they are in the heavens, so as to point to the North Star, Polaris, on the viewer’s left, the one and only star in the heavens that remains immobile, the one and only star to which a fixed symbol could constantly point. Thus, Polaris becomes a symbolic substitute for the ancient anchor of the heavens, Saturn.

The Big Dipper is traditionally used as a pointer constellation for the North Star. Thus, all who saw the Big Dipper constellation icon on the wall immediately knew it pointed to Polaris. It serves as a universal signpost, in a universal, symbolic language. Additionally, the selection of Polaris, the North Star, is most appropriate because, as was true of ancient Saturn, it is the only apparently fixed object in the sky, the polar anchor around which all heaven turns. So, too, was ancient Saturn depicted as ever turning, yet never moving, fixed and immovable.

Orienting observers

The location of the original Saturnstones on the south wall and the existing star icons on the west wall both direct the observer’s attention to the north, the original location of the Saturnian configuration of planets in antiquity. Thus we see how elements of the present heavens are combined with those of antiquity in this modern temple, as they were with all its ancient predecessors. This also serves to suggest that most, if not all, of the other temple icons depict some aspect of that ancient planetary alignment, the original cosmos, the first heavens.

So we see that Nibley was accurate in his assessment of the temple as a representation of the cosmos. More accurately, it depicts elements of the ancient sky and the modern sky - what the ancients meant by "cosmos." Thus, the temple becomes a virtual road map of the ancient heavens, pointing the observer to the original elements that are no longer seen.

To be continued ...

© Anthony E. Larson, 2001

Symbolism and Creation, Part 12

The creation accounts explain that light was created to dissipate the darkness on the first ‘day’ or event of creation. “Let there be light; and there was light.”

This introduces yet another puzzle. We learn later in the accounts that the sun, moon and stars were not present until the fourth ‘day’ of creation. How can that be? If the sun is our primary source of light, with the moon and the stars bringing up a distant second and third place, where did the light of the first creation period come from?

It’s a small leap of logic to infer that the light came from the emerging planet at the hub or center of the abyss, tornado or whirlpool. Further, the present source of all our light, the sun, the moon and the stars did not appear until that plasma ‘fog’ around that emerging body fully dissipated. This is why the “lights” of heaven did not appear in the scriptural scenario until the ‘fourth day’ — that is to say, until later in the sequence of events.

So, while the creation story may be fully symbolic, it also generally preserved the sequence of events as well as remarkably accurate observations of the realities behind or beneath the symbolism in many instances.

Of course, there is much, much more in the Genesis account that could be explored. Indeed, explanations and implications of the creation and garden stories alone could fill a thick book. But, this should suffice to demonstrate the symbolic nature of these stories.

And, what can be said about the first part of Genesis also holds for the rest of it. Indeed, this is true of most scripture, right on through the New Testament. Naturally, the further back in history we go, the more symbolic the accounts, making Genesis the most symbolic of all — the only exception being the dreams and visions of the prophets all the way down to John’s Revelation.

As a conclusion to this series, I point out one, last area of interest not often connected with the creation.

Let’s begin with a direct quote from Cardona’s recent work, God Star, which is most revealing. He quotes the first chapter of Genesis substituting English words with the original Hebrew at critical junctures:

“In the beginning Elohim create the shemayim and ‘eretz. And ‘eretz was tohu wa bohu, and darkness was on the surface of the tehom. And the ruach of Elohim moved upon the face of the mayim.”

“… Elohim was one of the ancient names of Saturn. Shemayim are “the heavens” — in the plural. Eretz is the word usually translated “Earth,” but it more properly means “land.” The words tohu wa bohu are traditionally translated as “without form and void” or “void and empty.” The tehom is understood as a watery abyss — the deep. Ruach means “spirit” or “soul,” but also “wind,” while the mayim are merely “the waters” — also in the plural.

“… the words of Genesis actually tell us … that, “in the beginning” — that is, as far back as man can remember — Saturn fashioned the “land” — which originally meant the land of the gods [Elohim] — which was formless and empty, while the “spirit,” or “wind,” of the same Saturn moved over the darkened waters.”

Following that, the Egyptian texts tell us of the next phase of creation, left out by the rabbinical scholars because it smacked of polytheism:

Atum [Saturn], the All, spits out or exhales the female power Tefnut and the masculine power Shu — “and from one god I became three”, say the texts, noting that the All, the One, the Creator-god “repeated himself”. All three together are Atum-Re (the archaic “sun” god, whom we now know to be Saturn), the god Shu (first form of the warrior-hero, identifiable astronomically with Mars) and the goddess Tefnut (first form of the divine mother, the planet Venus).

Talbott summarized this creation event thusly: ”What follows this phase is the displacement, departure, or “spitting out” of Mars and Venus as the first forms of the hero and goddess, who now become quasi-independent, highly active figures in the creation events.” That is, the very speech of the first god became the stuff of the other two. These other two planets, then, were perceived to be the result of the creative words uttered by Atum, the self-created god; these ‘words’ were seen and heard. The words of the creator actually became his two alter egos or two other parts (planets).”

But, the concept of a god actually creating two others has endured since that astral event. Hence, John, the apostle alludes to that fundamental doctrine in the opening verse of his gospel, which reads, “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.” This is just another version of the three-gods-in-one doctrine that dominated religion long before it became early Christian belief and, ultimately, Catholic dogma. But, we have to look to the Egyptian creation accounts and those from other cultures to understand John’s intended meaning.

Thus we see that the prophetic symbolism of our scriptures retains the essence of all those ancient archetypes and subsequent elaborations. Of course, without a firm and thorough grasp of the origin of that symbolism and its proper use, we stumble around in the dark as we attempt to understand our own scripture. We are as blind men and women, groping in the dark.

This same principle applies not only to the Bible, but to scripture revealed by Joseph Smith as well, since it all retains that same, time-honored symbolism. Moreover, it applies equally to modern temples, their architecture, adornments, rituals and furnishings.

Without this vital understanding of its symbolic meaning, we misunderstand and misinterpret all that has been restored in these latter days. Though we give homage to the restoration, we turn a blind eye to all its symbolism: It is a mystery to us. Thus, we turn a blind eye to fully half of the truths restored to us. How, then, can we still claim to be “children of the light,” as the Savior said?

So, this is as much a call to repentance as an exposition of gospel symbolism. To those Saints who read this, it should be a wake up call.

If I were a prophet, I would say something like this:

“Repent, all you who have been given the truth. You have treated this truth, this pearl of great price, as though it were dross and refuse, trampling it under your feet, for which cause you have brought condemnation upon yourselves and your children.

“Repent! And learn that which God, in his infinite mercy, has deigned to reveal to you through his servants, the prophets—even the prophet Joseph Smith.
“Turn your hearts to your fathers, as the fathers turned their hearts to you, their children. Despise and ignore not that which your fathers sought to bequeath and teach you under the direction of your God. Turn away from the worldly knowledge you so ardently embrace that brings only darkness and confusion, making you and your children deny God and his works.

“Repent, oh, repent ye, Latter-day Saints!”

But then, I’m no prophet. I’m just an average Latter-day Saint.

© Anthony E. Larson, 2008

Symbolism and Creation, Part 8

Now, that we have a better perspective of the Earth’s ancient heavens, let’s take a good look at the many creation accounts themselves. But, before we do, let me give you the lay of the land at this point in our quest so you will not enter this phase without your spiritual and temporal bearings.

After a lifetime of struggling to interpret the creation accounts in terms of our present views of cosmology and cosmogony — a frustrating exercise that often left us scratching our heads and wondering what the scriptures meant — we now have the promise that the concepts of the Polar Configuration of planets and the Saturn traditions will allow a much clearer, comprehensible and reasonable interpretation that virtually eliminates the questions we once had.

If true, this would be a monumentally positive development, especially if the basis of this new interpretation easily and informatively integrated with the rest of the restored gospel. This would be wonderful news for Latter-day Saints and a vital key to understanding our religion, our founding prophet, the ancient prophets and the scriptures.

Thus, what we are about to examine and explore has the potential to expand our gospel comprehension far beyond anything we may have heretofore considered. Moreover, it puts the lie to the argument that this information is peripheral and therefore inconsequential. Rather, it goes to the very core of our gospel understanding, to enlighten our minds and lift our spirits. This promises to be the most exciting bit of gospel study you have ever done.

As with the universal flood stories, all ancient cultures have creation stories. At first blush, they seem to have little to do with the creation stories we find in the scriptures. But, upon closer inspection and with the aid of our knowledge of the ancient polar configuration of planets and the Saturn traditions, we begin to see fascinating similarities that escaped us before.

For example, from accounts written by other ancient cultures, we learn that they all considered the creation to be the act of a god or gods. The Egyptian creator god was a solitary being called Atum or Ra. As we have seen, this was the planet Saturn.

Ra was seen by the Egyptians as a solitary god, and ancient sun that had no companions. “I am Atum, when I was alone in Nun,” he is made to say. He also declares himself to be “The God One,” or the “Only God” — “except who at the beginning none other existed.”

As in the Old Testament account, Atum is the uncreated creator. “I was the maker of myself,” or “I came into being of myself.”

In Genesis we read, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”
Reading the scriptural accounts of the creation leaves one with the impression that God related those events to Moses and Abraham who lived long after the actual event. That is, Genesis begins with the creation because the assumption is that it was the first thing to happen, long before Adam and Eve were placed on the Earth, which was the last act of God in the creation accounts.

But, upon reading the creation accounts from other ancient cultures, one cannot assume that they came by that information via revelation, as in the scriptures. So, where did the creation accounts told by other cultures come from if God revealed this information to only his prophets?

Here we come face to face with the concept that ancient man was a spectator to the events as the “One God” created the “heavens” and the “earth.” Unlike the Hebrew prophets Abraham and Moses, who leave the impression that God revealed the events of the creation, other cultures unabashedly assert that their ancestors observed the creation. In fact, many accounts recall a time before the creation. These are most intriguing, and further emphasize that the event that all cultures recall as the ‘creation’ was not the actual creation at all.

This concept cannot be overemphasized in our discussion here. That is, the creation that mankind observed and remembered was not the creation of this Earth at all. Rather, it was the creation of the heavens, God’s habitation, they recall, even though they consistently referred to it as “earth.”

Furthermore, if that is true, then the Genesis account may fall into the same category as the creation accounts from other cultures. That is, our assumption that it is a re-telling of the creation events by the Creator himself to his prophets may be incorrect.

In fact, when we compare Genesis with those other accounts, it becomes apparent that it is simply another version of one event, another telling of those things remembered by all cultures as the ‘creation.’

Did each invent its own story? The answer is: Yes and no. Each account from separate cultures has its own, curious take on that creative event, but they are remarkably similar in the story they tell. In fact, by taking a larger view of all these accounts, we come to the conclusion that it is the “One Story told ‘round the world.” While they differ in many respects from the Genesis, Abraham and Moses accounts, they have remarkable similarities — so much so that by comparing our scriptural accounts to those from other cultures, a more accurate and complete picture of the event known as the ‘creation’ emerges.

© Anthony E. Larson, 2008

Symbolism and Creation, Part 7

Turning now to Joseph Smith, we can see that what he described and explained in the Pearl of Great Price matches the Egyptian traditions and the Saturn myths.

Joseph’s explanation of Kolob as “First in government, the last pertaining to the measurement of time,” fits Saturn’s ancient role perfectly. It was perceived as the primary governing power in the heavens. Everything else appeared to move or revolve around it. While it appeared to fully rotate once daily, it also remained in a fixed heavenly station. Additionally, it was the timepiece par excellence. In the role of Kronos (Cronus), Saturn’s appearance was commensurate with the beginning of time. That is, the ancients had no way of telling time or differentiating night from day until they could see Saturn and its rotating crescent. Thus, its early appearance in the ‘creation’ was said to mark the beginning of time or timekeeping.

What is more exciting is that a reading of Abraham, chapter 3, from the standpoint of Talbott’s polar configuration of planets reveals what was, undoubtedly, the fundamental meaning of the Lord’s explanation to that ancient prophet. He used Semitic words such as ‘kolob’ and ‘ha-kokab-im’ because that is the language Abraham spoke. He described the original planetary configuration that existed before the Flood because it served to teach Abraham the core truth behind traditional beliefs and practices, as well as provide a teaching tool for spiritual truths, which he expounded later in that same chapter.

In fact, to someone well versed in the arrangement of the Polar Configuration, it becomes apparent that this is what God revealed to Abraham — the ancient order of the heavens that existed before the Great Flood. The closer one looks, the more apparent this becomes. One must ‘force fit’ the present arrangement of the planets and stars, as so many LDS scholars have attempted to do, in that described in this revelation. On the other hand, given what we know about the polar arrangement, it accommodates the description remarkably well.

In verse 2, we learn that Abraham saw “very great” stars near the throne of God. To the ancient mind, Saturn was perceived as the throne of god, if not god himself. The other planets in the arrangement, Venus, Mars and the 7 small moons that were seen to orbit Saturn, were called stars. They were the “governing ones” that dominated Earth’s ancient heavens. The name Kolob may well apply, in this account, to Saturn itself because it is referred to as the “one to govern all those which belong to the same order as that upon which thou standest.” Saturn was the apparent ‘anchor’ or ‘governor’ of all the heavenly host in antiquity, including the Earth.

The issue of night and day was very different under those ancient skies, dominated by Saturn. The light that ruled the day was the same light that ruled the night, though each was given a different name in most cultures. Janus, (ya-an-us) depicted in the Joseph Smith papyri as the two-headed god, represented the day and night duality of the same orb — one face for day, one for night. Significantly, it is this figure that the prophet identified as Kolob, the very orb that we’ve identified as Saturn.

In the period of time we would call day, Saturn was very subdued in appearance, washed out, if you will, by the brightness of sunlight. However, when the sun set, it grew brighter until, at the time of day we would call midnight, it was at its brightest. So when the Lord relates to Abraham that “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,” he is only reiterating what he already declared in verse 3, except that this time he calls this orb a “planet” instead of “star.” He was simply being more accurate in his description.

Indeed, the Lord’s description to Abraham of one planet standing above another until one comes to Kolob answers to the illustration drawn by Joseph Smith, and published by Philo Dibble, of the Earth’s antediluvian state, much better than it answers to the present arrangement of planets moving in distant orbits. (See Part 4 for this illustration.)

So we see that what was revealed to Abraham was quite different from what most Latter-day Saints believe, yet it serves to further substantiate this author’s thesis that the Polar Configuration, as Talbott explains it, was the actual state of the heavens in antiquity, and that understanding that fact illuminates the scriptures as nothing else.

The word Kolob is a construct of the Egyptian religion, based on the ancient heavens and not a present physical reality. What God revealed to Abraham was actually the order of the planets during the earliest epoch in our solar system, the Patriarchal Age, the time before the Flood known to Egyptians as Tep Zepi, or Golden Age, when our world and the heavens above it were vastly different than they are today. Both Abraham and Joseph Smith used Egyptian terms to describe the images they saw — Abraham saw it in vision, Joseph saw it on the papyri.

It should be gratifying to Latter-day Saints that modern research into Egyptian traditions, myth and legend has given credibility to the teachings and writings of this dispensation’s founding prophet and aided us tremendously in our efforts to comprehend scripture.

© Anthony E. Larson, 2008

Symbolism and Creation, Part 6

In order to understand gospel symbolism, one must understand its ancient origins. No one has done more in modern times to make this understanding possible than Dave Talbott, comparative mythologist and researcher extraordinaire. Rather than rehearse his findings here, I refer the reader to his writings, beginning with his Saturn Myth. Others of his writings can be found in the online newsletter, “Thoth,” which can be found at www.kronia.com, along with some more recent publications.

For those who have my books, you can find a summary of his views and their value to our understanding of gospel symbolism in volume 3 of The Prophecy Trilogy, “And There Shall Be A New Heaven And A New Earth.”

Talbott’s principle thesis presents us with an entirely new view of Earth’s ancient heavens, one that explains all gospel symbolism. When the ancients looked up into the heavens, this is what they saw during an early period of the evolution of the “grand constellation of worlds,” as Apostle Orson Hyde put it — a concept he undoubtedly learned from Joseph Smith.


The larger of the three orbs was Saturn, the turquoise-colored orb in the middle was Venus and the smaller, red orb was Mars.

Here is yet another view so there is no confusion about the planetary arrangement we’re talking about, the polar configuration also pictured in Joseph’s illustration given to Dibble (see Part 4).


When Joseph’s facsimiles and the Book of Abraham are considered in light of Talbott’s Saturn thesis, we see that Kolob may be simply another Egyptian name for the Saturn/Venus/Mars assemblage of planets during Earth’s earliest epoch. Those three are likely the three planets Joseph Smith drew for Philo Dibble.

The evidence for this is: Earth shared a common axis of rotation with those three, as pictured in the Dibble illustration, there were three planets in both scenarios and the Dibble illustration, if you look closely, even includes the plasma connections between the three. These commonalities are impossible to explain away.

In the Egyptian tradition, Re/Atum is Saturn. He is the father-god, the fixed, immovable sun god. The hat-heart is Venus, the female goddess who is everywhere in ancient mythology identified as the mother goddess. The ab-heart is Mars, the male warrior/hero/child who resides in his father’s eye, the ‘apple’ of his father’s eye. (Again, see Talbott for a thoroughgoing explanation of these concepts.)

The entire polar configuration was seen to rotate once every 24 hours, due to Earth’s rotation. Hence, the verb form of qalb, meaning “to turn over and over” is most appropriate. Additionally, the Latin Venus was called Verticordia, the turning or whirling heart.

In fine, Joseph’s declaration that Hah-ko-kau-beam (ha-kokab-im) are stars was accurate. The etymological connection between kokab and Kolob indicates that both have the meaning ‘star.’ Kolob also has the additional meaning of ‘heart,’ an otherwise odd association with the word ‘star,’ except in the context of the Saturn myth and the Polar Configuration.

© Anthony E. Larson, 2008

Symbolism and Creation, Part 5

To understand the creation story, we must first understand the vision of the creation given to Abraham.

Every Latter-day Saint has read about Kolob in Abraham from the Pearl of Great Price. Many have speculated about it; most have given it little thought. Kolob’s possible location and identity in our universe seems to be the primary focus of such speculation. A careful review of this bit of revealed knowledge in light of the Saturn traditions may prove informative.

In chapter 3, it appears that God reveals to Abraham information about a star named Kolob that is physically located nearest to where he, the Lord, actually resides in the universe. An amplified explanation of Kolob can be found on page 37, opposite facsimile no. 2, the Egyptian hypocephalus Joseph Smith found among the papyri that came into his hands.

The first thing we see upon reading Joseph’s explanation is that some of these terms are authentic Egyptian. This should not be surprising since he is gleaning this information from an Egyptian document. The question is: Where did he learn these ancient Egyptian terms? For example, Joseph names one figure Hah-ko-kau-beam (Pearl of Great Price, Fig. 5, p. 37.)

It is reasonable to assume, given his lack of formal training in the Egyptian language, that he first heard the word spoken during a revelation, since his rendering of the name is clearly an attempt to write it phonetically (something any of us might be forced to do when attempting to write a word from a foreign language we had only heard spoken).

A close look tells us that the hyphenation does not conform to the way the Semitic word is actually written. A more proper hyphenation of the word would have been: Ha-kokab-im. The Egyptian kakab is the word for ‘star.’ Typically written in consonants, without vowels, it is rendered: KKB. Modern scholars choose the vowel sounds that are implied by their use in equivalent words in related modern languages. In effect, they make a guess as to the vowel sounds. Thus, Joseph’s kokab (or kokob as it is in Abraham) may be more accurate than the scholarly version, kakab. The preceding ha is a determinative, meaning ‘the,’ and im is a plural ending, the equivalent of the letter ‘s’ in English. Thus, Joseph Smith correctly wrote, albeit phonetically, the Egyptian words ‘ha kokab im,’ meaning ‘the stars.’

Kolob continues this same pattern. Written KLB, it is clearly closely related in meaning to KKB, kokab. So, Kolob has ‘star’ as part of its meaning, but Nibley and others assert that it is closer in meaning to the Arabic word qalb, meaning ‘heart.’ Yet, the Arabic-speaking peoples routinely use qalb as part of star names: qalb al-asad for Regulus, for example. The verb form of the word also means to turn upside down, to turn over and over. (This will become more meaningful in a moment.)

The Egyptians thought of Canopus as the premier heart-star. Atum, the Egyptian creator god, was called “the Firm Heart of the Sky.” Indeed, Egyptians conceived of their creator/king or sun god, who we will identify as the planet Saturn, as having two hearts — the hat-heart was female, Tefnut, and the ab-heart was male, Shu — one within the other, although translators rarely concern themselves with the distinction. Also, Horus was said to be ab en hat, "heart of the heart." It is likely that the use of ab in those words is the reason why scholars also point to ‘heart’ as one meaning of kolob and kakab.

Ironically, Shu is also the one “who sits in the midst of the Eye which is the seat of his Father.” Thus, the eye and the heart of the sun god, Re, are virtually synonymous in Egyptian lore, an unexpected and curious association.

© Anthony E. Larson, 2008