This is an archived copy of a post written by Conflict Of Justice (conflictofjustice.com). Used with permission: Conflict Of Justice may not agree with any alterations made.
Joseph Smith said figure 5 in Facsimile 2 was “said by the Egyptians to be the Sun, and to borrow its light from Kolob through the medium of Kae-e-vanrash, which is the grand Key, or, in other words, the governing power, which governs fifteen other fixed planets or stars.” Anti-Mormons dispute this:
“We now know that the process of nuclear fusion is what makes the stars and suns shine. With the discovery of quantum mechanics, scientists learned that the sun’s source of energy is internal, and not external. The sun shines because of thermonuclear fusion; not because it gets its light from any other star as claimed by the Book of Abraham.” (CES Letter)
Gravity Not Heat – What governing power moves “fifteen other fixed planets” around the sun? Obviously gravity. So, were the Egyptians right that the sun “borrows its light” from this power, this “grand key” or “governing power” of gravity?
I hesitate getting into this too deeply because one needs to deeply understand physics to understand the question. CES Letter obviously doesn’t understand the physics, and they appeal to people who learn about science from cable television instead of textbooks. People are naturally distrustful of crazy metaphysical theories–understandably so–and the last thing I want to sound like is some crazy pseudoscience blog, which is what a correct full answer to this question would sound like to anyone who doesn’t have a masters degree in physics.
In short, the Egyptians, according to Joseph Smith, were not totally on target, no. After all, why would Joseph Smith clarify that this is just what the Egyptians thought? But it is interesting how close this their concepts are to modern science, and how correctly Joseph Smith talked about ancient astronomical theories.
CES Letter argues that “the sun shines because of thermonuclear fusion.” Well, yeah, fusion is how the sun produces sunlight radiation.
But where does the sun get its energy? We are talking about where the sun gets light, not how it produces light. Stars form when a mass of protons collect as dust, and its gravity collapses as it increases in mass. The gravity that formed the sun was instigated by some “nearby supernova explosion, collision with another gas cloud, or the pressure wave of a galaxy’s spiral arms passing through the region.” Some external force in the galaxy instigated the sun’s formation of mass.
Some speculate that Kolob has something to do with the center of the Milky Way galaxy. This is because the stars of our galaxy rotate around the galactic center of the Milk Way much like the planets of our solar system around the sun. Gravity is the common “governing power” that the sun holds over the planets and the galaxy holds over the sun. Using Newtonian mechanics, modern scientists have theorized that “the galactic center does really hold enough mass to exert gravity on the solar system to hold it in an orbit.” Our sun indeed formed from the “revolutions” of our galaxy, like Joseph Smith said the Egyptians believed. The sun gets energy from the galaxy’s gravity and movement, and it is governed by the galactic center. “From here emanates the power that holds our galaxy together.”
At a quantum level, motion is the key to creating particles. Gravity makes a field of objects move relative to another object as their “center.” When the Egyptians spoke of “borrowing light,” perhaps they referred to the transmission of photons that makes this movement possible: “A material particle moves relatively to another particle when it absorbs at least one photon energy.” The Egyptian concept of “borrowing light” does not quite sound the same as this modern understanding of the Milky Way’s formation, but it sounds similar.
If that sounds like a bunch of scientific mumbo-jumbo, fine, it doesn’t really matter. Really, the only thing Abraham actually said about Kolob is that it is, according to the facsimile, the first creation, closest to celestial glory, and it governs our “order.” Everything else about light and governing powers, is just what the Egyptians believed.
CES Letter Logical Fallacies
| Falsehood | CES Letter incorrectly claim, “With the discovery of quantum mechanics, scientists learned that the sun’s source of energy is internal, and not external.” If that were true, how did the United States build a fusion bomb without the use of quantum mechanics? The truth is, quantum mechanics is not how scientists discovered modern theories for the sun’s energy source. |
| Strawman Argument | The Book of Abraham does not actually make this claim that the sun “receives” light from an external source. The question of how the sun produces energy is a big fake argument. What the Facsimile claims is about what governs the sun, and what Egyptians believed. CES Letter refuses to admit the obvious fact that Joseph Smith gave two different contexts for Facsimile 2, the Egyptian and the Abrahamic meanings. |
| Poisoning The Well | I wish I could explain at length how the Book of Abraham aligns with modern science, but this is a no-win discussion for Mormons because it would involve highly complex ideas that most people do not study. People dismiss hearing new scientific explanations. This is why you see Hollywood keep complex scientific discussions on a second grade level. So CES Letter can throw out some smart-sounding buzzwords that they heard on the History Channel once and subvert any kind of rational discussion. |
| Appeal To Novelty | CES Letter builds a narrative that quantum mechanics is superior to the gospel, even though they clearly do not understand it. |
| Shifting Goalposts | CES Letter previously argued that the Book of Abraham is based on Newtonian mechanics. But where did Newton talk about the sun “getting” light from some other star? The physics they incorrectly attribute to Abraham here does not follow only Newton. It also involves quantum physics. |
| Appeal To Ignorance | Quantum mechanics is a developing science but it is far from proven. By definition, you can’t prove it. |
| Repetition | This argument builds on the vague innuendo that CES Letter already repeated. Like in their previous argument, CES Letter repeats the premise of the argument several times instead of actually explaining it or giving examples. CES Letter repeats this argument again on p. 68. |
The great thing is we don’t need to! The fact is, we don’t have quantum mechanics or thermonuclear fusion in the Book of Abraham, because it isn’t a science textbook! This entire argument is built on a false strawman portrayal of what Mormons believe. It is an effective argument because people naturally trust scientific buzzwords over a fringe book of scripture from some ancient prophet.
This argument sounds like clown college to anyone who has studied physics. But it appeals to anti-Mormons who want to sound like smart scientists and bash religion smugly, like they see Bill Maher do on TV. The entire argument is goofy.
Previously, CES Letter said the Book of Abraham was not close enough to what we know about Egypt. But now they take something Joseph Smith correctly said about what Egyptians believed and say it is too antiquated–too different from the modern day. The shifting of goalposts is dizzying. They are just all over the place, and this shows just how dishonest they are. The last thing they are interested in is a reasonable discussion.
What is brilliant about CES Letter is how they allege unreasonable associations as well as unreasonable discrepancies, part of the Contradiction Strategy. They go back and forth between contradiction and similarity, like a demolition man swinging a rusted old metal pole back and forth in order to tear it out of the ground quicker. One second we are appalled at inconsistencies. The next we are shocked at the similarities. One second it is language similar to the bible. The next it is science that doesn’t fit modern quantum mechanics.
But just raising the question gives it some tiny amount of credibility. As is often the case with innuendo, this argument successfully uses the kafkatrapping tactic. They begin with the frame that the Book of Abraham’s relationship with the bible deserves to be called into question, and we buy into it. As one of the strongest physical evidences for the Mormon Church’s authenticity, this allows CES Letter to go on and use physical evidence as a wedge to attack the church. This leads to an obsession with truth that you can only see, and a superstitious outlook.
Fake Science – Satan wants people to pridefully think they know all about science, but really they know very little. CES Letter incorrectly believes quantum mechanics is necessary to know how the sun produces energy. But the Satanic appeal to science is useful for anti-Mormons if it can propagate fake science that leads people astray. That’s why you have top “respected” scientists giving us “proof” for why God doesn’t exist. Followers of Satan accept this fake science without the slightest critical thought or understanding of nature’s laws. It is willful ignorance.
CES Letter drops a few (incorrect) bits of leading evidence, and the reader connects to dots in their mind to the inevitable conclusion. If Abraham (Joseph Smith) thought the sun got light from some star named Kolob, and we know modern science disproves this, then Joseph Smith must be a conman. CES Letter does not give us this logic, but allows the reader’s mind to string it together. They do this because people are much more likely to believe a deduction if they figured it out on their own, subconsciously. They are also more likely to believe the evidences for that deduction, which in this case are falsehoods. Abraham (Joseph Smith) did not claim this. They did not say Kolob was a star. Modern science aligns with the idea.
Changeable Truth – What is the alternative to scripture that has remained essentially the same for many thousands of years? Well, scripture that is always changing. Truth that is never static for Marxists. In the anti-Mormon’s narrative, there is no way the story of Noah is true today the way it was back then, nor should it be. Truth is relative, always fitting modernity. It’s just another branch of science.
Today, why don’t we add some more female characters to the Book of Abraham story, to show that we are “inclusive?” Why don’t we add something to justify abortion? That is what the anti-Mormon alternative to scripture would be. It is important to keep religion based on immutable, eternal truth and separate from science, because humans are imperfect, and social justice always involves human avarice which always leads to atrocity.