On January 1st, millions of Christians around the world began their annual Bible reading plans with Genesis 1. This year, Latter-day Saints also began their Old Testament study as part of the Come, Follow Me curriculum—but they didn’t start with Genesis. Instead, they began with Moses 1 and Abraham 3, chapters drawn from purported revelations to Joseph Smith.
For Latter-day Saints, these chapters serve as an inspired prologue to Genesis—somewhat like how Christians might read John 1 as a theological lens on creation and Christ’s role. But the pressing question is this: do Moses 1 and Abraham 3 actually support the Bible’s theology and Christology? Do they center Christ and exalt Him, or do they risk distorting and confusing the biblical narrative?
With Moses 1, Joseph Smith claimed that he was restoring a lost part of Genesis that functioned as an inspired prologue to the creation accounts. But when we look at Moses 1 carefully, we can see several ways that it subtly—or less than subtly—shapes how Latter-day Saints will read the Old Testament for the remainder of the year.
1. Moses 1 Diminishes Jesus by Reframing Who He Is—and Who He Is Like
Moses 1 is written from the perspective of God the Father speaking directly to Moses. Throughout the chapter, the Father emphasizes that He alone is God, that Jesus is His Only Begotten, and that creation is carried out through the Son (see Moses 1:6, 16, 32–33). While this may initially sound compatible with biblical language, the way Moses 1 frames Christ’s identity is notably different from the New Testament.
One striking feature is the repeated emphasis that Moses is “in the similitude” of God’s Only Begotten. God tells Moses, “I have a work for thee, Moses, my son; and thou art in the similitude of mine Only Begotten” (Moses 1:6).
In the New Testament, the emphasis consistently runs in the opposite direction. Jesus is described as “the image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15), “the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature” (Hebrews 1:3), and the one who can say, “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9).
Biblically, Jesus is not primarily presented as being like humanity; rather, humanity is called to be conformed to Him because He perfectly reveals God. The Incarnation is the decisive moment when the eternal Son takes on human flesh—not because He was already fundamentally like us, but because He graciously stooped to take on humanity in order to save us. (See Phil 2)
Moses 1 subtly reverses this emphasis. Long before the Incarnation, Jesus is framed in relation to humanity, and Moses is portrayed as sharing in Christ’s likeness. This reinforces a Christology in which Jesus is not the eternal, self-existent God revealing Himself to humanity, but rather the highest exemplar of what humanity is meant to become. The Son is portrayed not as God Himself, but as a subordinate agent of the one true God—lacking the clear divine identity that John 1 so powerfully asserts: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1).
This shift matters. If Christ is primarily an example for us to follow, our attention is redirected away from our need for salvation and toward our own potential. That error distorts not only how we understand Jesus, but also how we understand ourselves and the nature of grace.
2. Moses 1 Elevates the Role of Mankind
One of the best-known verses in this chapter for Latter-day Saints reads, “This is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the eternal life of man” (Moses 1:39).
This verse has become almost a credo within LDS theology regarding the purpose of God’s creation. It places mankind at the center of cosmic significance, making human destiny the ultimate aim of God’s work.
By contrast, Genesis 1 begins with God as the sole actor. He alone creates, and mankind appears only at the end, as the culmination of creation. Genesis emphasizes God’s glory and sovereign action, whereas Moses 1 shifts the focus toward humanity—effectively making man the centerpiece and God’s work subordinate to human exaltation.
Although this post is focused on Moses 1, it is worth noting that Abraham 3 goes even further, placing humanity directly into the creative process. While Genesis 1 emphasizes God as the sole force of creation and the New Testament highlights Jesus’s role as the agent of creation (John 1:1–3; Colossians 1:16), Abraham 3 depicts humans as participants in creation itself—something the Bible never does.
3. Moses 1 Elevates Joseph Smith
Moses 1 also contains a prophecy of Joseph Smith, described as a prophet “like unto thee” who would restore this lost text (Moses 1:41). The language closely parallels Deuteronomy 18:15, 17–19, where Moses predicts a prophet like himself whom Israel must hear: “The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you… you must listen to him… I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him.”
In the Bible, that prophet is Jesus, and the New Testament makes this explicit (Acts 3:22–23; Hebrews 3:1–6). No other early church leader—neither Peter nor Paul—ever fulfills that role. Instead, the New Testament consistently presents Jesus as the one greater than Moses, whom Moses himself anticipated.
Hebrews underscores this contrast by explaining that “Moses was faithful as a servant in God’s house, but Christ is faithful as a son over God’s house” (Hebrews 3:5–6). For the author of Hebrews, Jesus is the ultimate and unique prophet—the singular fulfillment of the Moses-like promise.
By applying this same language to Joseph Smith, Moses 1 elevates him as a Moses-like figure and subtly diminishes Christ’s uniqueness as the true and final Moses who perfectly reveals God’s will and character.
4. Moses 1 Creates Doubt About the Rest of the Old Testament
Moses 1 is presented as a lost portion of Genesis restored by Joseph Smith, and its closing verses emphasize that its truth would be revealed in the last days only to those who believe and are spiritually prepared (see Moses 1:40–41).
This framing subtly distorts how readers approach Genesis and the rest of the Old Testament. Instead of engaging the biblical text directly to discern God’s message, readers are primed to ask, What is missing here?
When they encounter a difficult or confusing passage, the instinct becomes that something must have been lost—and that Joseph Smith or later LDS prophets have restored it.
After reading Moses 1 as a prologue, the Old Testament is no longer studied on its own terms. It is approached through the lens of the restoration. What the Bible contains is assumed to be incomplete or diminished, while Joseph Smith’s revelations are assumed to supply the missing truth.
Conclusion: What Is Lost When We Start with Moses 1 and Abraham 3?
Although Latter-day Saints eagerly turn to the Old Testament this year, beginning with Moses 1 and Abraham 3 redirects readers from the Old Testament’s own message. These texts shift the focus away from God’s sovereignty as Creator, lower Jesus from His rightful place, elevate humanity in ways the Bible never does, focus attention on Joseph Smith, and draw the reliability of the Bible into question.
For Latter-day Saint friends reading the Old Testament this year, I would encourage approaching it on its own terms—not assuming it is missing truths restored by Joseph Smith, but asking instead, What is God saying to me through this text?
Reading Moses 1 and Abraham 3 first, however well-intentioned, risks obscuring the message that Genesis—and the rest of the Old Testament—was originally meant to convey.