Alma begins interrogation of Korihor by clarifying the accusation of priestcraft. Alma not only says that the accusations are untrue, but he specifically says that Korihor knows this. This is an interesting assertion because it is diametrically opposed to what Korihor has said. There is something about Korihor that allows Alma to discuss what he knows that is deeper than what Korihor is saying that he knows. This will become an issue again during this confrontation.
The suggests that there is something about Korihor that gives Alma this basic understanding. We have already suggested that Mormon’s structural use of the story strongly suggests that Korihor is a Lamanite. Alma’s assumption of knowledge about what Korihor must believe underneath his rhetoric suggests that Korihor must have been an apostate Nephite who has become Lamanite politically and religiously. This combination of former presence among the Nephites and current connection to the Lamanites satisfies both of the conditions we appear to have in the text. If Korihor were known to have once been Nephite (again politically and therefore religiously) we can understand that Alma would understand what his belief system would have been prior to his Lamanite “conversion.”
The putative conversion to the Lamanite ways and beliefs would provide an even stronger parallel for Mormon to contrast to the sons of Mosiah. As we noted previously, the sons of Mosiah were not only fighting against the church, but were rather apostate themselves, and likely with ties to the Lamanites. Thus the sons of Mosiah were probably Lamanite sympathizers who were coverted to the gospel, and then took their new belief to the people with whom they had formerly sympathized.
Korihor would be the mirror of that picture. He would be a Nephite who converted to the Lamanites, then attempted to bring the Lamanite “gospel” to the people with whom he had formerly sympathized (the Nephites). Thus the structural use of Korihor is quite direct, and unlikely to be accidental. Even though Mormon does not make it explicit to us, it is probable that to his contemporaries, the concepts discussed would, by themselves, have marked Korihor as a Lamanite sympathizer. It is probable that this structural contrast would have been more obvious to Mormon’s contemporaries than it is to us, since we are less conversant with what those Lamanite positions might have been.
Social: Alma gives us a discussion of the nature of the division between politics and religion among the Zarahemlaites. Alma indicates that he is paid as a judge, but not for his work in the church. Thus there is not only a formal division between church and state, there is also an economic division between the two. Alma specifically makes use of the idea that he has labored with his own hands for his support (verse 32). This is an important phrase because it gives us the tie between the current social structure and the earlier Zarahemla system in which Benjamin himself could state that he has labored with his own hands (Mosiah 2:12, Mosiah 2:14).
Benjamin had set this as an ideal, and he, in his position combining both government and religion, was able to accomplish it. The increasing complexity of Nephite society would have demanded greater activity of the political leadership, and the payment of the judges explicitly shows that the government was sufficiently complex that they received compensation for their efforts. Nevertheless, this ideal of social equality represented by laboring with one’s own hands was retained as a religious principle, and manifest in the lack of payment to the religious leaders.
This difference does lead us to the question of how Korihor could state that the Nephite priests might be guilty of priestcraft and be believed by the people. It is probable that most of the Nephite leaders in the church were also leaders in the community, and certainly Alma was a judge in addition to his “church” responsibilities. In Jershon and Gideon we have judges who are clearly also believers, and probably church leaders. Thus it is probable that while there is a divisibility between church and state, there were nevertheless many who held prominent positions in post aspects of society. As part of their social duties they received compensation, and it may be that it was sufficiently difficult for the people to separate their roles that the conceptual sources of their compensation was not separated either.