The Book of Abraham Problem | One Faith Delivered

In 1835, Joseph Smith purchased four Egyptian mummies and several papyrus scrolls from a traveling exhibition. He claimed to translate one of these scrolls as "the writings of Abraham, while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus." The book was published in 1842, with three illustrated "facsimiles" and Smith's own explanations of each figure. It was canonized as LDS scripture in 1880 and remains so today in the Pearl of Great Price.

The problem: In 1966, portions of the original papyri were discovered in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. They were transferred to the LDS Church, which published photographs in 1968. Professional Egyptologists — both LDS and non-LDS — were then able to compare Smith's "translations" against the actual documents. Their verdict was unanimous: the papyri are standard Egyptian funerary texts with no connection to Abraham whatsoever. This page presents that comparison in detail.

1835

Smith purchases Egyptian papyri and mummies. Announces they contain writings of Abraham.

1842

Book of Abraham published in Times and Seasons with three facsimiles and Smith's explanations.

1966–68

Original papyri found at the Metropolitan Museum. Transferred to LDS Church. Egyptologists translate them.

2014

LDS Church's own Gospel Topics Essay concedes the papyri are "standard funerary texts" with no reference to Abraham.

Facsimile No. 1 — The Lion Couch Scene

Facsimile 1 Published by Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, March 1, 1842

Joseph Smith's Explanation (1842)

Fig. 1 "The Angel of the Lord." ✕ Incorrect

Fig. 2 "Abraham fastened upon an altar." ✕ Incorrect

Fig. 3 "The idolatrous priest of Elkenah attempting to offer up Abraham as a sacrifice." (Smith also drew a human head on this figure in the filled-in lacuna — where the original was missing.) ✕ Incorrect — and forged

Figs. 4–7 "The idolatrous gods of Elkenah, Libnah, Mahmackrah, Korash." Names not found in any known Egyptian religion or mythology. ✕ Invented

Egyptological Translation

Fig. 1 The god Anubis (jackal-headed), performing the funerary rite of resurrection over the mummy of the deceased priest Hor (the papyrus owner). A completely standard Egyptian embalming scene.

Fig. 2 The mummy of Hor, depicted on a lion-couch (funerary bier). His phallus is visible in the original — indicating resurrection imagery, following the Osiris myth. Smith omitted this in publication.

Fig. 3 The ba-bird (human-headed falcon) — the soul of Hor hovering above his body, a universal Egyptian funerary symbol. Smith filled the damaged area with a human head and knife, which Egyptologist Robert Ritner has called "crude pencil additions" not supported by any parallel Egyptian source.

Figs. 4–7 The four canopic jars (sons of Horus): Imsety, Hapy, Duamutef, and Qebehsenuef — protecting the internal organs of the deceased. Standard funerary equipment present in nearly every Egyptian burial context.

Sources: Robert K. Ritner (Univ. of Chicago), "Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham — A Response" (2014) · LDS Gospel Topics Essay: "Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham" (2014) · Michael D. Rhodes, BYU, "Teaching the Book of Abraham Facsimiles" (2003)

Facsimile No. 2 — The Hypocephalus

Facsimile 2 Published by Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, March 15, 1842

Facsimile 1 — Original Papyrus — Original Papyrus

Facsimile 1 — Smith's Published Version — Smith's Published Version

Facsimile 1 — Comparable Egyptian Scene — Comparable Egyptian Scene

Joseph Smith's Explanation (1842)

Fig. 1 "Kolob, signifying the first creation, nearest to the celestial, or the residence of God." ✕ Not found in Egyptology

Fig. 2 "Stands next to Kolob, called by the Egyptians Oliblish... a governing power also." ✕ Name not in any Egyptian text

Fig. 3 "Is made to represent God, sitting upon his throne, clothed with power and authority; with a crown of eternal light upon his head." ✕ Incorrect

Figs. 4–7 Further explanations of LDS cosmological concepts — Shinehah (sun), Kokob (star), Olea, Flossis — names completely invented, appearing nowhere in Egyptian religion. ✕ No Egyptological basis

Figs. 8–21 Smith states these contain "too sacred to be revealed" content. These figures are actually standard hieratic Egyptian text, which can now be fully translated. ✕ Deciphered — not sacred secrets

Egyptological Translation

Overview Facsimile 2 is a hypocephalus — a circular funerary amulet placed under the head of the deceased. Over 100 examples exist in museum collections worldwide. They were used to keep the deceased warm in the underworld by identifying them with the sun god. This one belonged to Hor, the same priest from Facsimile 1.

Fig. 1 Khnum-Ra — a four-headed deity representing the sun god in his different aspects. Standard hypocephalus imagery found in dozens of parallel documents.

Fig. 3 The ithyphallic Min (or Amun-Min) — an Egyptian fertility deity. Smith's Facsimile 2 has a hand covering the figure's phallus, an alteration not present in the original Egyptian source.

Figs. 8–21 Standard hieratic Egyptian text — the LDS Church's own 2014 essay acknowledges these are "not well understood by Egyptologists." In reality, the Egyptologist Michael D. Rhodes translated the visible portions as invoking Osiris and identifying the deceased as Hor. The text is a prayer for the deceased's resurrection, not esoteric cosmological revelation.

Sources: Michael D. Rhodes, "The Joseph Smith Hypocephalus — Seventeen Years Later" (1994) · Marc Coenen, Egyptologist, KU Leuven · Robert K. Ritner (2014)

Facsimile No. 3 — The Throne Scene

Facsimile 3 Published by Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, May 16, 1842

Joseph Smith's Explanation (1842)

Fig. 1 "Abraham sitting upon Pharaoh's throne, by the politeness of the king, with a crown upon his head, representing the Priesthood." ✕ Incorrect

Fig. 2 "King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his hand." ✕ Doubly incorrect: wrong gender, wrong identity

Fig. 3 "Signifies Abraham in Egypt." ✕ Incorrect

Fig. 4 "Prince of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, as written above the hand." ✕ Incorrect

Fig. 5 "Shulem, one of the king's principal waiters, as represented by the characters above his hand." — "Shulem" appears in no Egyptian text. ✕ Name invented

Egyptological Translation

Fig. 1 Osiris seated on his throne — the god of the dead and the afterlife, presiding over the judgment scene. The hieroglyphs above this figure read "Osiris." This is confirmed by both LDS Egyptologist Michael D. Rhodes and University of Chicago's Robert Ritner.

Fig. 2 Isis — the goddess, a female figure — stands before Osiris. Smith identified her as the male "King Pharaoh." The hieroglyphs above her identify her as "Isis the great, the god's mother." Smith confused a goddess for a king.

Fig. 3 The deceased Hor being presented to Osiris for judgment — a scene found in hundreds of funerary papyri across Egyptian history. The hieroglyphs above name him as "Hor, the justified."

Fig. 4 Maat — the goddess of truth and cosmic order, identifiable by the feather on her head. A female deity Smith called a male "prince."

Fig. 5 The name above this figure is Hor — the same priest who owned the entire papyrus. Smith read this as "Shulem, one of the king's principal waiters" — an invented name for an invented character. The hieroglyphs are unambiguous.

Sources: Robert K. Ritner (2014): "In Facsimile 3, Smith confuses human and animal heads and males with females. No amount of special pleading can change the female 'Isis the great, the god's mother' (Fig. 2) into the male 'King Pharaoh.'" · Michael D. Rhodes, BYU (concurs on identifications of Osiris, Isis, and Hor) · LDS Gospel Topics Essay (2014)

The Three Core Problems

📜

Wrong Text

The actual papyri are the Breathing Permit of Hôr — a common Egyptian funerary document dating to c. 200 B.C., more than 1,600 years after Abraham lived. The LDS Church's own 2014 essay concedes: "None of the characters on the papyrus fragments mentioned Abraham's name or any of the events recorded in the book of Abraham." Every Egyptologist who has examined the text — LDS and non-LDS alike — agrees on this.

🪄

Wrong Figures

In Facsimile 3 alone, Smith misidentified 5 out of 5 figures: he called a goddess a king, a deceased priest "Abraham," and invented names (Shulem) found in no Egyptian language. He confused female deities with male figures multiple times. LDS apologist Michael D. Rhodes — a faithful Latter-day Saint Egyptologist at BYU — confirmed the correct Egyptological identifications in 2003, inadvertently validating the critics' readings.

✏️

Altered Evidence

In Facsimile 1, portions of the original papyrus were damaged (lacunae). Smith filled these gaps before publication — drawing a human head on the priest figure and a knife in his hand. When compared to intact parallel Egyptian documents, these additions are incorrect. The original damaged section would have shown an animal (likely jackal) head — not a human one. The "translation" thus also contains fabrications of the physical evidence.

LDS Responses & Their Problems

Theory 1: The "Missing Scroll"

The Book of Abraham was translated from a different scroll — one that was lost in the 1871 Chicago fire. The surviving papyri are not the source. Therefore the Egyptological critique is irrelevant.

Why This Fails

The "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" — documents in Smith's own handwriting — show Egyptian characters from the surviving papyri matched line-by-line to the English text of the Book of Abraham. Smith's own scribes linked the text to the existing papyri. Additionally, the Facsimiles are embedded in the Book of Abraham text itself, with internal references directing the reader to the illustrations as part of the same document. The missing scroll theory requires ignoring Smith's own working papers.

Theory 2: The "Catalyst" Theory

Smith used the papyri as a spiritual catalyst — looking at the characters and receiving inspired revelation about Abraham that had no relation to what the characters actually said. It was a vision, not a translation.

Why This Fails

This concedes that Smith's claim to have "translated" the papyri was false — he did not translate. Yet he consistently described his work as translation, the book's introduction still reads "translated from the papyri," and the Book of Abraham explicitly directs the reader to the facsimiles as integral parts of the record ("I will refer you to the representation at the commencement of this record," Abr. 1:12). The catalyst theory also cannot explain why a revelation-by-inspiration would produce wrong identifications of Egyptian figures that happen to match the actual papyri's content.

✦ The Evidential Weight of This Problem ✦

The Book of Abraham issue is unusual in apologetics because it does not require theological argument — it is a falsifiable, empirical claim. Joseph Smith said he translated a specific set of documents that still exist. Professional scholars in the relevant discipline have translated those same documents. The translations do not match. This is not a matter of interpretation or hermeneutics. It is a matter of whether Egyptian means what Egyptologists say it means.

Both the LDS Church's own 2014 Gospel Topics Essay and its faithful Egyptologist at BYU (Michael D. Rhodes) agree on the Egyptological identifications that contradict Smith's explanations. The point of divergence is not the facts, but what conclusions to draw from them. For the Catholic apologist, those conclusions are clear: a genuine prophet of God, claiming to translate a specific ancient text by divine authority, would not produce a document unrelated to the source material, with fictional names, misidentified genders, and physically altered evidence.