In the 30th chapter of Alma we have a whole chapter on the doings of an anti-Christ, including a detailed summary of the false doctrine that he taught. With respect to this elaboration, Gerald Lund broaches the question, Why would Mormon take time to do that? Do we really need a summary of the teachings of evil men? What is it about Korihor that was so compelling to Mormon that he felt justified to give it four pages of textual treatment?
According to Lund, Korihor is a good example of a scriptural “foil.” One of Webster’s definitions of a foil is something that is used “to enhance by contrast.” For example, a jeweler places diamonds on black velvet to provide a contrasting backdrop, or foil, for the gems. [Brilliance and hardness are thus contrasted with darkness and softness.] There are numerous places in the standard works where the scriptural writers use that same technique, placing two contrasting principles or examples side by side to show even more clearly what they were trying to teach… .
The Korihor story is an obvious foil in one sense and a subtle, but perhaps even more significant foil, in another sense. The obvious one is that we find a story of an “evil missionary,” a man who seeks to preach false doctrine and proselytize people to his way of thinking, sandwiched right in between the account of the sons of Mosiah and their mission to the Lamanites, and Alma’s great mission to the Zoramites.
There is, however, something more subtle than this. There is an interesting conceptual chain related to the “power of the word” that flows through this section of the Book of Mormon. As the account of the mission of the sons of Mosiah begins, Mormon notes that they had great success in bringing the Lamanites to the gospel because of “the power of their words” (Alma 17:4; emphasis added). The next ten chapters show just how true that statement is. But as we come to the end of their fourteen-year mission, what do we find again? In Alma 26, Ammon begins to review their tremendous successes. And what does he credit for this incredible conversion story? “The power of [God’s] word which is in us” (Alma 26:13; emphasis added).
Chapters 27 and 28 finish out the account, and Mormon then chooses to insert Alma’s prayer. And what does he pray for? Alma’s prayer is that he might have even greater power to preach the word than he has hitherto had. [See the commentary on Alma 29:1]
This is what precedes the Korihor account. Let’s see what follows. In chapter 31, Alma learns that the Zoramites are in a state of apostasy… . Mormon is careful to note why Alma chooses to begin his own mission to this apostate people: "And now, as the preaching of the word had a great tendency to lead the people to do that which was just--yea, it had had more powerful effect upon the minds of the people than the sword, or anything else, which had happened unto them--therefore Alma thought it was expedient that they should try the virture of the word of God (Alma 31:5; emphasis added). In chapter 32, Alma begins to teach the Zoramite poor how to find God and uses a powerful analogy of a seed. Often in the Church, we refer to Alma 32 as being a great chapter on faith. This is not incorrect; but the seed Alma refers to is not faith, it is the word of God (see Alma 32:28).
Thus we see in one place after another in this section of the Book of Mormon, beginning in Alma 17 and going through Alma 33, that there is reference after reference to the power of the word. And what is placed right in the middle of this chain? Korihor! And therein lies the more subtle scriptural foil. Korihor himself is an example of the “power of the word,” only this time it is a negative example. [Gerald N. Lund, “An Anti-Christ in the Book of Mormon--The Face May Be Strange, but the Voice Is Familiar,” in The Book of Mormon: Alma, The Testimony of the Word, pp. 107-110]
Note* Sometimes the term “word” is used synonymously with “covenant.” [Alan C. Miner, Personal Notes] [See the commentary on Alma 44:5] [Christ is the “Word.” See John 1:1]
Alma 30:6 [Korihor] began to preach unto the people against the prophecies … concerning to coming of Christ ([Illustration] Three Diverse Nephite Opponents. [John W. Welch and Morgan Ashton, Charting the Book of Mormon, Packet 1, 1997]
There Came a Man Korihor into the Land of Zarahemla and He Was Antichrist
LaMar Garrard asks, Why would the Lord direct Mormon to devote an entire chapter to the details of the teachings and final destiny of Korihor when so many other things were written on the original plates? As we compare the teachings of this man and the beliefs of those today who advocate the philosophy of naturalism, we see a striking similarity. I believe that the Lord foresaw the adverse effects of naturalism on our modern world and therefore purposely directed Mormon to include the teachings of Korihor in his record.
Bertrand Russell was a renowned mathematician and philosopher who advocated the naturalistic viewpoint. He said the following:
Out of the work of the great men of the seventeenth century a new outlook on the world was developed … I think there were three ingredients in the scientific outlook of the eighteenth century that were specially important:
(1) Statements of fact should be based on observation, not on unsupported authority.
(2) The inanimate world is a self-acting, self-perpetuating system, in which all changes conform to natural laws.
(3) The earth is not the center of the universe, and probably Man is not its purpose (if any); moreover, “purpose” is a concept which is scientifically useless.
People advocate the philosophy of naturalism (whether they realize it or not) when they no longer regard these statements as restricted outlooks to be taken only in scientific endeavors but shift to the following positions: (1) knowledge cannot be gained by any other means than by the use of the natural senses, (2) the universe is really an inanimate self-acting and self-perpetuating system, and (3) there is no real purpose in the existence of the universe.
Korihor took the naturalistic viewpoint. He advocated that what the prophets say and have said (their recorded words, or scriptures) are foolish traditions since we cannot know of anything that does not come through the natural senses (things we cannot see). (see Alma 30:13-15)
Belief in a self-acting, self-perpetuating system in which all changes conform to natural law eliminates a belief that God has any power to direct or control matter. Yet Joseph Smith and the scriptures indicated that when God comands the elements, they obey his will. (Abraham 2:7; Moses 1:25; Helaman 12:7-17; D&C 133:23; Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 197-98). Instead of believing that God is the author of all natural law and therefore ultimately controls all phenomena in the physical universe (theism), the naturalist believes that self-existing “Law” is the sovereign power in the universe and ultimately controls all phenomena." According to this view, all causation is material (according to natural law) rather than mental (originating in the mind of god or some other living creature). However, to Alma, God was not just a super scientist or super engineer who discovered and worked with self-existing natural laws; rather, he was the Great Creator, who authored the laws that man attempts to discover. Thus a description of how matter behaves would also be a description of the handiwork of God. This was the position of Alma when rebutting the position of Korihor. (see Alma 30:44)
In such a naturalistic universe as that advocated by Korihor, where there were no laws of God to break, there would be no sin nor spiritual death that results from sin. Instead of being motivated in their behavior by a fear or love of God, people’s actions would be motivated by a survival of the fittest, both physically and mentally, which was no crime. Holding such naturalistic views would influence people to believe that they were not accountable to a higher power for their actions. As a result, they would be led away into sin. (see Alma 30:17-18)
Since Korihor’s universe held no room for a God, God’s laws, or certain effects resulting from the breaking of these laws, to be consistent Korihor would have to deny the fall of man which came as the result of the transgression of Adam and Eve. (see Alma 30:25) … . Thus Korihor would have had to deny a need for an atonement and of course a need for Christ to perform the atonement. (see Alma 30:17, 16, 26-27) Consequently, Korihor taught the people “that there should be no Christ (Alma 30:12), and that to look forward to the coming of Christ was to yoke themselves ”under a foolish and a vain hope" (Alma 30:13).
If we accept the Book of Mormon as the word of God, the account of Korihor teaches us that the beliefs associated with the philosophy of naturalism are anti-Christ in nature. [LaMar Garrard, ’Korihor the Anti-Christ,“ in Studies in Scripture: Book of Mormon, Part 2, pp. 2-11] [A more detailed discussion on the shift from theism to naturalism is given by LaMar Garrard in ”What Is Man?" Hearken O Ye People (Sandy, Utah: Randall Book Company, 1984), pp. 134-42.]