The philosophies of Satan versus the Word of God

In The Book of Mormon, we meet three anti-Christ preachers: Sherem, Nehor, and Korihor. We also read of two groups of disaffected Nephites who took on similar beliefs: the people at Ammonihah (Alma 9-12) and the Zoramites (Alma 31-35).

As I read about Korihor in Alma 30 last week, I wanted to compare the arguments of each, and then consider how those arguments match what anti-Christian and anti-Church agitators say today. I also wanted to correlate how Church leaders and members responded, to see what we could learn from them. Here’s what I found (I was looking for similarities in approach and general argument, rather than the specific ways each expressed these):

Commonalities between the anti-Christ preachers

1. They mock what people in the Church of Jesus Christ believe.
2. They flatter people by telling them things the natural man wants to hear (such as that all sin will be forgiven, and other reasons that they should do whatever they want).
3. They work hard at their craft.
4. They deny that things can be known spiritually – such as truth communicated by the Holy Spirit, revelation from angels, or knowing of things to come (prophecy).
5. They lead people who follow them, and their ideas, to do wickedness.
6. They are eloquent – in a negative and mocking way.

All of these anti-Christ preachers also die. Sherem dies after recognising his guilt and acknowledging his deception before the people; Nehor is killed as punishment for his murder of Gideon; Korihor is struck dumb after asking for a sign (the one that will stop him from preaching falsehood anymore, and the reason Alma rejects his request to be healed), and is later stampled to death by the Zoramites. Mormon’s lesson from this is that “the devil will not support his children at the last day, but doth speedily drag them down to hell” (Alma 30:60).

A few differences

1. Korihor – of whose arguments we hear a lot more than the others – accuses Church leaders of evil:
   • oppressing members of the Church so they can’t rise up and be free (Marxism is not new),
   • taking their money to live in luxury, and
   • indoctrinating them with pretend beliefs they themselves don’t know, and which cannot be known.
   • He contends that religion is bondage, relying on outdated traditions for power and legitimacy. (Postmodernism is also not new).
2. Nehor asks for money from the people, and becomes rich.
3. Both Korihor and Sherem ask for a sign.

How Church members and leaders responded

I’ll go into a bit of detail here, since it’s the specific answers, along with the approach, that I wanted to see.

• Jacob asks if Sherem denies that Christ shall come. Sherem says he wouldn’t, if Christ existed, but that He doesn’t. So Jacob asks if Sherem believes the scriptures, which he says he does. Jacob then reminds him that all the prophets have prophesied of Christ – the scriptures are full of their prophecies about Him. Jacob confirms this with his own prophetic witness, and his personal witness by the power of the Holy Spirit, that there is a Christ, and without His atonement, all mankind would be lost.
• We’re not told what Gideon said to Nehor, and Alma’s interaction with him is limited to his judgement as the chief judge, more than religious or philosophical argument. But we learn that Gideon “admonished [Nehor] with the words of God“. Alma judged him according to the law, for murder and priestcraft (trying to get money for preaching – which he did successfully – and setting himself up as a teacher of truth without authority from God).
• We learn a lot more about Korihor’s arguments, which Alma countered with facts (he didn’t engage him in philosophical debate, except for some counter-arguments regarding evidence of God). These facts were:
  • Church leaders, including himself, didn’t take members’ money so they could live comfortably (“glut themselves on their labours”, as Korihor put it). Alma and other leaders worked hard for their own support, and in the service of the church, and did not receive wages for that (“not one senine have I received”, says Alma).
  • Clearly, the only reason these leaders would work so hard without pay was (a) because it was true, and (b) because they loved the people. The joy of others’ conversion and righteousness was their reward.
  • Alma asked if Korihor believed in God (no), then stated simply that He knew He existed and that Christ would come.
  • Alma asked Korihor what evidence he had that God didn’t exist, or that Christ wouldn’t come, and pointed out that he only had his own word – there was no evidence he could present that proved it.

In his second answer, Alma is absolutely brilliant. Let’s follow that one for a moment to see what he is suggesting. Korihor has stated that people can believe only that which they can see, or prove to be true. Then he categorically states that he believes there is no God. Alma points out that he is trapped in his own epistemology, saying, “And now 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 own word only” (Alma 30:40). If Korihor really were consistent (in believing only that which he can experience), then he cannot believe there is no God, because he cannot prove there is no God. (Gerald N. Lund)

• Alma then said he had “all things” as evidence that God does exist – including things he can see – as did Korihor, and asked again if he denied all of that evidence.
• He pointed out Korihor’s true motives: he had “put off” the Holy Spirit, and in this way, the devil had gotten power over him, so that he was being filled with darkness, instead. Now, Satan was using him to do his own work of destroying men.
• Korihor asks for a sign, saying that then he’ll believe, but Alma tells him he has enough signs. These include:
  • the scriptures, filled with testimony and other evidence
  • all creation – the earth, nature, and the solar system (we could add the stars, also)
• Alma repeatedly asks Korihor if he will still deny these things, each time he points them out.

Some lessons

Both the similarities and differences listed here are common to what anti-Church and anti-Christian speakers preach today. This happens in multiple ways, and it’s not just those who are focused on such ‘anti-‘ activities.

We have a whole cultural establishment that works at telling people that many of the things once frowned upon in society are now fine – and not only fine, but good; better, even, than the traditional norms, morals, and values. Such radical values are displayed flagrantly, with deliberate, mocking disregard for those moral traditions held by the rest. Their promoters scoff at the idea that these developments are harming our societies, and should be treated with the same care and caution they always have – for good reason. Either God doesn’t exist, so there are no eternal consequences, and you should enjoy life while you have it, or He does, and isn’t going to strike you down for not keeping the Sabbath Day holy or going to a nightclub; after all, God is love, isn’t He? He just loves everyone, welcomes everyone, and whatever you do, He might lightly reprimand you like an indulgent father, then let you scamper off to do whatever it is people in Heaven do.

Those who are more clearly out to argue specifically against belief in God or the Church of Jesus Christ follow these anti-Christ arguments and approaches shown in the Book of Mormon closely. They mock our beliefs, flatter the natural man, are often eloquent (some are just in bad taste), ‘rise up in great swelling words’ in debate, deny that spiritual knowledge is possible or as valid as physical evidence (because faith has no place in their belief structure), invite their followers to live as they please, not the way that restrictive church dogma constrained them, and work hard at their job of leading people away from belief in God and/or truth, some earning large incomes from their efforts.

Other Resources

1. This article presents the financial incentives from preaching against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, revealing several of the tactics used by the Nephite anti-Christ preachers.
2. I found this article from the BYU Religious Studies Centre insightful and interesting, as it explores this topic more deeply and shares good lessons to be gained from it.
3. This is another list of tactics of those who teach Satan’s doctrines, gathered from Alma and Amulek’s experience in Ammonihah (Alma 8-12) – look at the second section, titled How Satan and his followers operate.
4. Here’s a short summary of each of the three anti-Christ preachers’ teachings (see the first section, Two More Anti-Christs). It’s a good conclusion to what I’ve shared here.

I think it’s essential to clearly understand and be able to recognise these arguments of anti-Christ and anti-Gospel preachers and agitators, as they continue to be spread now. As Gerald Lund writes in the chapter referenced above, the faces might be new, but the messages are the same. It is Satan trying to deceive people away from the salvation found in Christ; from the recognition of sin and the need for repentance; from the knowledge of our dependence on God’s mercy and His love for us all. These teachings are found in direct efforts and in philosophies pretending to be about kindness, restitution, clear thinking, and freedom from oppressive constraints.

The accounts of these three agitators are included in The Book of Mormon so that we’ll be prepared and able to discern them ourselves. We can take lessons from the ways Alma and others responded to their claims, and remember that, as someone said in church recently, we’re on the winning team – God wins; the Saviour wins. Light, truth, and righteousness are greater than darkness and evil, and will win in the end.