|
Countering Korihor’s Philosophy What Korihor taught is as contemporary as today’s TV shows. Alma’s approach is still the right response.
Gerald N. Lund, “Countering
Korihor’s Philosophy,” Ensign, July 1992, 16
President Ezra Taft Benson has often reminded us that all of the major Book of Mormon writers said they were writing for our day. Consequently, “we should constantly ask ourselves, ‘Why did the Lord inspire Mormon (or Moroni or Alma) to include that in his record? What lesson can I learn from that to help me live in this day and age?’ ” (Ensign, Jan. 1992, p. 5.)
In Alma 30, Mormon gives a lengthy account of a man he calls
“Anti-Christ” (Alma
30:6), including a detailed summary of his false
teachings. Using President Benson’s guideline, let us examine
the story of Korihor to see why Mormon felt it important to tell
us his story.
First, though, it will help to look at some philosophical terms
used by contemporary philosophers. Doing so will help us see the
deviousness—and the attractiveness to the carnal mind—of
Korihor’s teachings (which were Satan’s teachings).
Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy that deals with
the nature of reality. It tries to answer the question “What is
real?” The question of whether there is a God and a spiritual
world beyond the natural world we know is a metaphysical
question. Though today we often use the word supernatural
in a more limited sense, originally it referred to a world
higher, or above, the one we see and experience with our
physical senses.
The second area of philosophy we will consider is axiology.
Axiology is the study of ethics and values. It wrestles with
such questions as “What is good?” “What is ethical?” “What are
right and wrong?”
A third branch of philosophy is epistemology.
Epistemology is the study of how we know what is real or
true.
There are numerous epistemological systems. Some apply directly to what Korihor was teaching the Nephites:
Authoritarianism is the system by which truth is learned
from those who are authorities or experts. We trust learned men
or women, such as parents, teachers, religious leaders, and
consultants, to give us truth in their areas of expertise.
Rationalism refers to gaining truth through logic. In
rationalism we ask, “Does it make sense? Is it logical?”
Pragmatism determines whether something works. The
business world is often pragmatically oriented, focusing on
whether a new product or marketing strategy actually produces
the desired results. If it works, it is valid; if it doesn’t, it
is rejected.
Empiricism uses observation or personal experience to
arrive at truth. This knowledge is gathered primarily through
the senses—through what one sees, touches, hears, smells, and
tastes.
Which of these systems do Latter-day Saints subscribe to? The
answer, of course, is all of them. But we also rely on another
way of knowing truth: divine revelation. In this method,
truth comes either directly from God or indirectly through his
prophets.
Whether he recognizes it or not, every person holds to a
metaphysical position, trusts in at least one system of
epistemology, and holds a personal axiology or set of values and
ethics. Furthermore, these three areas of our own philosophy are
interrelated. Our metaphysics (our view of reality) influences
our epistemology (the way we gain knowledge), and together the
two determine our axiology (our values).
Let’s suppose, for example, that a person like Korihor rejects
the idea that there is a spiritual dimension to life. That
metaphysical position automatically determines what that person
will accept as truth. Revelation is rejected because the reality
of God is rejected. Deciding what is good and bad, therefore,
will not be dependent on any set of God-given laws or fear of
eternal consequences.
This was Korihor’s fundamental lie.
Korihor’s Corollaries
Like any philosophical system, Korihor’s doctrine had
metaphysical, epistemological, and axiological aspects.
Together, they enabled him to convince many to reject the
traditional values taught by the Church.
For example, Korihor’s argument that “ye cannot know of things
which ye do not see” (Alma
30:15) reveals his epistemology—his system of
determining truth—to be primarily empirical, or based on
observation and use of the senses. (See chart 1.) However, the
Apostle Paul says, “Faith is … the evidence of things
not seen.” (Heb.
11:1; italics added.) Korihor’s stance, however, is,
“If you can’t see it, you can’t know it.” He therefore rejects
prophecy because prophecy deals with the future, and you cannot
“see,” or experience, the future with the physical senses.
Consequently, all talk of a future Savior and redemption is to
be rejected on principle.
There are a number of corollaries, or inferences, that flow out
of Korihor’s fundamental philosophy. The first of these is
revealed when Korihor is arrested and taken before Giddonah, the
high priest. Giddonah demands to know why, if Korihor is correct
in what he said, the people find so much joy in their religious
experience. (See
Alma 30:22.)
Korihor’s answer goes something like this (see
Alma
30:23–28): There are two explanations for why people
believe in religion. First, they have been indoctrinated by
their parents (the “foolish traditions” of the fathers), and
second, they have been deceived by religious leaders whose
motives are personal gain—money and/or power. Further, Korihor’s
philosophy—expressed in his teaching to the people—is that this
indoctrination of the people brings psychological
abnormalities—“derangement” or a “frenzied mind.” (Alma
30:16.) Since there is no God and since religion is a
farce, Korihor concludes, we can live as we please without fear
of eternal consequences.
Giddonah decides that Korihor’s case warrants the full attention
of Alma, so Korihor is taken to Alma in Zarahemla. It doesn’t
take Alma long to determine the ultimate source of Korihor’s
teachings. “The devil has power over you,” he says to Korihor,
“and he doth carry you about, working devices that he may
destroy the children of God.” (Alma
30:42.) Later, after Korihor is struck dumb, he
confirms Alma’s words. “The devil hath deceived me,” he admits,
“for he appeared unto me in the form of an angel, … and he
taught me that which I should say.” (Alma
30:53.)
Why would Satan care about such things as our view of
metaphysics and epistemology? Because if he can shape our views
on those issues, then those views provide a basis, as Alma
declares, to “destroy the children of God.” (Alma
30:42.) The philosophy Satan taught Korihor is a
rational system. It is not true, but it is rational! If we
accept the assumption that there is no super-natural reality,
then it logically follows that there is no God. If that is the
case, then man is the supreme being. It also follows that if
there are no eternal realities, then there are no eternal
consequences for man’s actions. Korihor’s reasoning is that man
himself determines what is right and wrong, not some set of
rules laid down by a group of phony religious leaders claiming
to speak for a God who doesn’t exist.
This is the heart of Korihor’s doctrine. By preaching his false
philosophies, Korihor accomplishes Satan’s designs in grand
fashion. Note Mormon’s description of the end result of his
teachings: “And thus he did preach unto them, leading away the
hearts of many, causing them to lift up their heads in their
wickedness, yea, leading away many women, and also men, to
commit whoredoms.” (Alma
30:18.)
What a victory for Satan! This is not just wickedness. The
people are proud in their wickedness! And why shouldn’t
they be? Korihor has convinced them that there is no God and no
ultimate right and wrong. All the “psychological hangups” they
feel—guilt, shame—are simply the result of the foolish teachings
of ignorant parents or self-serving religious leaders.
Korihor Today
President Ezra Taft Benson has taught that “the Book of Mormon
exposes the enemies of Christ. It confounds false doctrines and
lays down contention. (See
2 Ne. 3:12.)
It fortifies the humble followers of Christ against the evil
designs, strategies, and doctrines of the devil in our day. The
type of apostates in the Book of Mormon are similar to the type
we have today. God, with his infinite foreknowledge, so molded
the Book of Mormon that we might see the error and know how to
combat false educational, political, religious, and
philosophical concepts of our time.” (Ensign, Jan. 1988,
p. 3.)
Today, the world is permeated with philosophies similar to those
taught by Korihor. We read them in books, see them championed in
the movies and on television, and hear them taught in classrooms
and sometimes in the churches of our time. Note just a few
examples drawn from modern writings:
“We believe that traditional dogmatic or authoritarian religions
that place revelation, God, ritual, or creed above human needs
and experience do a disservice to the human species. …
Traditional religions often offer solace to humans, but, as
often, they inhibit humans from helping themselves or
experiencing their full potentialities. … Too often traditional
faiths encourage dependence rather than independence.”
(“Humanist Manifesto II,” The Humanist, Sept./Oct. 1973,
pp. 5–6; compare
Alma 30:14,
16, 27–28.)
“We can discover no divine purpose or providence for the human
species. … No deity will save us; we must save ourselves.
Promises of immortal salvation or fear of eternal damnation are
both illusory and harmful. They distract humans from present
concerns, from self-actualization, and from rectifying social
injustices.” (Ibid; compare
Alma 30:18,
23–24, 27–28.)
“Science affirms that the human species is an emergence from
natural evolutionary forces. As far as we know, the total
personality is a function of the biological organism transacting
in a social and cultural context.” (Ibid; compare
Alma 30:17.)
“Whether we ought to follow a moral principle or not would
always depend upon the situation. … In some situations unmarried
love could be infinitely more moral than married unlove. Lying
could be more Christian than telling the truth. … Stealing could
be better than respecting private property. … No action is good
or right of itself. It depends on whether it hurts or helps. …
There are no normative moral principles whatsoever which are
intrinsically valid or universally obliging. We may not
absolutize the norms of human conduct.” (Situation Ethics:
True or False? A Dialogue between Joseph Fletcher and John
Warwick Montgomery, Minneapolis, Minn.: Dimension Books,
1972, back cover. Compare Alma 30:17.)
Here we see clear evidence of Mormon’s inspiration to give us a
full account of Korihor and his teachings. Korihor’s teachings
are old doctrine, and yet they are ideas as modern as today’s
high-speed printing presses and satellite dishes.
A Prophet’s Answer
So how do we deal with these false philosophies? Fortunately,
Mormon not only gave us Korihor’s doctrines, he also gave us an
inspired answer to them. This is the real value of the Korihor
account.
The first thing to note is that Alma does not get into
philosophical debate with Korihor. He doesn’t allow himself to
be pulled onto the ground that Korihor tries to define as the
area of debate. There is a great lesson in that. We combat false
philosophies with revelation and true doctrine, not academic
debate.
Second, Alma exposes Korihor for what he is. (See chart 2 for a
summary of how Alma dealt with Korihor.) In effect, Alma says to
Korihor: “You know that we don’t profit from our service in the
Church, but you say we glut ourselves on the labor of the
people. Therefore I say you deliberately twist the truth.” It
all comes down to one irrefutable conclusion: Korihor is a liar.
But there is more to Alma’s answer than that. Alma takes
Korihor’s own philosophy and catches him in a trap of his own
making. Korihor teaches that we can know only what we can see.
(See
Alma 30:15.)
But when questioned, Korihor categorically denies that he
believes there is a God. Alma then asks, “What evidence have ye
that there is no God, or that Christ cometh not? I say unto you
that ye have none, save it be your word only.” (Alma
30:40.)
It is an inspired insight on Alma’s part. Korihor is not
consistent in his own thinking. If we truly can know only those
things for which we have empirical evidence, then we cannot
teach there is no God unless we have evidence for that belief.
And Korihor has no evidence.
Korihor will consider only evidence that can be gathered through
the senses. In such a system, it is much easier to prove there
is a God than to prove there is not a God. To prove there
is a God, all it takes is for one person to see, hear, or
otherwise have an experience with God, and thereafter the
existence of God cannot be disproved. But here is what it would
take to prove there is no God: Since God is not confined
to this earth, we would have to search throughout the universe
for him. We assume God is able to move about, so it would not be
enough to start at point A in the universe and search through to
point Z. What if after we leave point A, God moves there and
stays there for the rest of the search?
In other words, for Korihor to say that there is no God, based
on the very criteria he himself has established, he would have
to perceive every cubic meter of the universe simultaneously.
This creates a paradox: In order for Korihor to prove there is
no God, he would have to be a god himself! Therefore, in
declaring there is no God, he is acting on “faith,” the very
thing for which he so sharply derides the religious leaders!
No wonder Mormon chose to detail the story of Korihor. It
teaches a great lesson for our day. No matter how clever, how
sophisticated the philosophies of an anti-Christ may seem, they
are not true. They are riddled with contradictions, errors, and
false assumptions. The gospel, on the other hand, is truth—truth
that has stood the test of centuries, truth that can withstand
rational examination, truth that is pragmatic and practical,
truth that can be confirmed through personal experience. A
believer need not apologize for his or her beliefs, for these
beliefs withstand every scrutiny much more efficiently than do
the doctrines of Satan.
A Final, Tragic Lesson
There is another lesson that Mormon draws from the story of
Korihor. After Korihor is confounded by Alma, he demands a sign
before he will believe. Korihor receives his sign—he is struck
dumb, and evidently deaf as well. (See
Alma 30:51.)
In that pitiable state, Korihor resorts to begging for his
livelihood. He finally goes among a people called the Zoramites,
and there he is “run upon and trodden down” until he dies. (Alma
30:59.)
Mormon summarizes the lesson he wants us to learn: “And thus we
see the end of him who perverteth the ways of the Lord; and thus
we see that the devil will not support his children at the last
day, but doth speedily drag them down to hell.” (Alma
30:60.) How unlike God and his dealings with his
children!
Another lesson to be learned from Korihor is found in the
following chapter, after Mormon finishes telling the story of
Korihor. In Alma 31, Mormon begins the account of a missionary
effort among the Zoramites. Alma, two of his sons, and the sons
of Mosiah go to the land of Antionum to try to reclaim the
apostate Zoramites.
Remembering that it was the Zoramites who killed Korihor, note
the following phrases from
Alma 31
that describe their beliefs:
• They “had fallen into great errors.” (Alma 31:9.) • They had rejected traditions that they felt were “handed down … by the childishness of their fathers.” (Alma 31:16.) • They did not want to be “led away after the foolish traditions of our brethren,” which they believed did “bind them down to a belief in Christ.” (Alma 31:17.) • They refused “to believe in things to come, which they knew nothing about.” (Alma 31:22.)
Familiar echoes? Indeed. The Zoramites represent the end product
of Korihor’s own philosophy. How ironic that Korihor should meet
his death at the hands of a people who practiced what he
preached!
Korihor’s teachings were based on lies. Indeed, Korihor himself
confessed this when he wrote, after he had been stricken dumb,
that he “always knew there was a God.” (Alma
30:52.) Yet Korihor had tried to teach people that
happiness is to be found independent of God and the gospel. The
Book of Mormon shows that this is not possible. The philosophy
Korihor taught, so pervasive among us today, leads to a dead
end. This is undoubtedly why, under the power of inspiration,
Mormon gave his detailed account of Korihor and his false
teachings—so that we today may more easily distinguish between
Christ and anti-Christ, between eternal life and spiritual
death.
Korihor’s Philosophical Foundations
Alma’s Answer to Korihor (Alma 30:32–45)
© 2005 Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
