Kolob is a star or planet from the Book of Abraham - originally described in an ancient egyptian scroll - translated by Joseph Smith. Kolob is near the throne of God (in outer space to my understanding).

Is Kolob mentioned in the New Testament and if not, how come?

  • 8
    I'm not sure how to say "Because mainstream Christians think Mormonism is total nonsense" in a non-inflammatory way.
    – curiousdannii
    Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 1:44
  • 2
    @curiousdannii I don't think that has anything to do with the question, though...
    – Matt
    Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 1:48
  • 3
    Well the mainstream Christian answer to why it's never mentioned is because Kolob doesn't exist, and therefore God wouldn't have inspired it to be included in the NT.
    – curiousdannii
    Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 1:51
  • 3
    Of course. I'm not saying that mainstream Christians think it doesn't exist because the Bible doesn't mention it, but because they think Joseph Smith was a fraud. Anyways you'd obviously know what non-LDS people believe about this, and as I said, I don't know how to say this in a non-inflammatory way. Someone else can try. Or maybe I will try later, if no one else gets there first.
    – curiousdannii
    Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 1:54
  • 2
    @rpeg your accepted answer for this question is not appropriate considering the way you've worded and scoped your question. Your question is tagged lds and since you do not specify in the title or body of your question that you are seeking a broad answer it is only appropriate that you select and answer that represents the lds view. Please review the other answers to this question and accept an appropriate answer, or edit your question to suit your currently accepted answer.
    – ShemSeger
    Commented Nov 10, 2014 at 3:56

4 Answers 4


It's not in the New Testament, but I would be more surprised if it was found in the New Testament.

The compilers of the New Testament were obviously not concerned with revealing the deepest mysteries of God (see comment for clarification), but rather, were focused on documenting the life and ministry of Jesus Christ and His Apostles.

Most of the New Testament's purpose is to show that Jesus is the Christ. This was done by the accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The epistles, then, mainly declare His doctrine and document the ministry of the apostles.

Abraham was shown much about the sky in vision. His communion with God as recorded in Abraham 3 is highly personal to him. It's not something that would be written in an epistle to somebody else. It's not a direct account of the life and ministry of Christ or His apostles.

As the Book of Abraham is more like a personal journal rather than a letter or biographical account, I don't see why, even if the compilers of the Bible had Abraham's manuscripts, they would choose to include it with the New Testament.

Of course, any number of answers -- mainly guesses -- could be given for why anything else isn't in the New Testament, either. Or the Old Testament. Mormons would say that because these things aren't revealed in the Bible, it validates the need for a restoration.

  • 1
    "The compilers of the New Testament were obviously not concerned with revealing the deepest mysteries of God, but rather, were focused on documenting the life and ministry of Jesus Christ and His Apostles." How did you arrive at this conclusion that the compilers of the New Testament were not concerned with revealing deepest mysteries of"god"? On what basis do you make this claim?
    – rpeg
    Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 4:45
  • @rpeg I suppose I'm implicitly comparing the direct relevance to our salvation of the doctrine contained in the New Testament to that of the less-directly-relevant topic of Kolob, which I think we all agree a priori, is one of the deeper mysteries of God. Perhaps I can revise my paragraph to make that comparison more clear.
    – Matt
    Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 5:37
  • 5
    I don't agree that Kolob is one of the deeper mysteries of God. Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 16:08

The non-LDS answer as to why Kolob isn't mentioned in the New Testament is that they believe it is a fictional idea created by Joseph Smith. Non-LDS churches believe Joseph Smith was a fraud and reject the inspiration and authority of all of the Mormon scriptures, including the Book of Abraham, the book where Kolob is mentioned. Joseph Smith claims he translated the Book of Abraham from Egyptian papyri known today as the Joseph Smith Papyri, but non-Mormon Egyptologists state the papyri have nothing in common with the Book of Abraham.

In addition most Christians believe the throne of God is a metaphorical concept rather than a physical object, and so no planet or star in the universe can be considered to be closest to God's throne, which is what is notable about Kolob. Verses such as Psalm 93:2, 103:19, Isaiah 66:1 and Matthew 5:34, among others, are used to support the idea that God's throne is metaphorical.

  • How do other Christians go about perceiving the "thrown of God" as metaphorical? Is it up to each individual to decide what's metaphorical and what isn't?
    – rpeg
    Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 23:02
  • 2
    I think it goes along with two things: God is a spirit, and God doesn't reside and isn't contained in his creation. Individuals are free to decide what they want on this, but I mentioned it because I'm not aware of any branch of Christianity why teaches God's throne is physically in this universe other than the Mormons.
    – curiousdannii
    Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 23:05
  • So you're assertion that the throne of god is metaphorical is just opinion?
    – rpeg
    Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 23:27
  • 1
    I think that would be good for another question - but it's off topic for this one.
    – curiousdannii
    Commented Jan 16, 2014 at 0:00
  • 1
    Actually, @curiousdannii, I don't think that the Mormons believe that God's throne is located somewhere in this universe. Kolob is said to be "nearest", but is this a physical nearness or a spiritual nearness. It doesn't say. Did God speak to Moses or not? Was it a long distance call, or did He show up physically in that burning bush? Commented Feb 4, 2014 at 6:18

Sort of. This is akin to asking "Does the Old Testament have any mention of Jesus?" It does, but not by that name.

Similarly, the Bible implies Kolob's existence:

Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool

Acts 7:49 (see also Matthew 5:34)

God's throne in the heavens.*

Of the stars in the heavens, one of them is the closest. The NT doesn't happen to name that star, but Abraham does:

And I saw the stars, that they were very great...

And the Lord said unto me: These are the governing ones; and the name of the great one is Kolob, because it is near unto me

Abraham 3:2-3

The name "Kolob" might be unique to extra-biblical texts, but its existence isn't.

*"Heaven" is interpreted variously by Christians as Earth's atmosphere, outer space, or something else. This interpretation is closest to the outer space one...literally "the heavens". It matches the juxtaposition of "earth".


A better question would be: Why is it there in the Book of Abraham? Because really, it's not like it is very important for us to know about some star named Kolob "closest to the throne of God", whatever that exactly means. In my opinion it is not even clear what "closest" really means here.

If you read the chapter, you see that Abraham is shown the stars, but what God really wants to show him, what he is preparing to show him, is the pre-mortal world. The idea Abraham is getting from the stars that are shown to him is:

If there are two things, one greater than the other, then there is a third thing that is even greater, until we get to God himself. Likewise, if there are two spirits, one greater than the other, there is a third that is even greater, until we get to God. This is to show that even though spirits are eternal, there are differences and some are more righteous and "great" than others. And then he explains the plan that is set in place to lift his children up and help them progress.

Kolob is completely irrelevant in most other contexts, it is used as an example and symbol here. There is no really useful doctrine that can be taken from it, except in the context that it was used in. Although Abraham learned something about astronomy here, the real lesson taught is a spiritual one.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .