Korihor

[Bill Hamblin]

We discussed Alma 30 and Korihor today. I posted my summary of Korihor's teachings on my web page. Here are what I see as the ten foundational claims of Korihor. It is interesting that essentially none of the claims of the New Atheists are, in fact, “new”.

1. Atheistic

“God … never has been seen or known” (28, 37-40, 45, 52-3), or agnostic (48)

2. Denies Christ

“Anti-Christ” (6, 12), “there should be no Christ” (12, 22, 39)

“ye cannot know that there shall be a Christ” (15, 26)

“there could be no atonement made” (17, 26)

rejected the Fall (25)

3. Materialistic and naturalistic presuppositions

belief in spiritual things is irrational “foolish things” (13)

“ye cannot know things which ye do not see” (15, 24)

“belief in things which are not so” (16)

“every man prospered according to his genius” (17)

“when a man is dead that is the end thereof” (18)

“show me a sign” (43-45, 48)

4. Rejects spiritual manifestations as mental instability or lying

belief is the “effect of a frenzied mind” and “derangement of your minds” (16)

rejects “traditions … dreams … whims … visions and … pretended mysteries” (28)

5. Rejection of historicity of scripture

“foolish traditions of your fathers” (14, 16, 23, 27, 31)

belief in “traditions of your fathers” is a “derangement of your minds” (16)

“the traditions of your fathers … are not so” (16)

6. There is no prophecy

preaches “against the prophecies … concerning the coming Christ” (6)

“vain and foolish hope … foolish things” (13)

“no man can know anything which is to come” (13, 22, 24)

7. Publicly attacked Church Leaders (31)

Church leaders “usurp power and authority over” the people (23)

Church leaders want to “keep [the people] in ignorance” (23)

Church leaders “keep [the people] down in bondage” (27, 23, 24, 28)

Church leaders “glut [them]selves with the labor of [the people] hands” (27, 31)

Church leaders “deceive this people” (35)

the Church “have all gone astray after an unknown god” (53)

8. Mocked Church rituals

rejected “foolish ordinances” (23)

9. Denies the existence of sin = amoral

“whatsoever a man did was no crime” (17)

“commit whoredoms” (18), “pleasing to the carnal mind” (53)

10. Attempted to convert others to their beliefs

“leading away the hearts of many” (18)

“perverting the ways of the Lord” (22, 60)

“leading away the hearts of the people” (45)

“lying and … flattering words” (47)

[CASteinman]

I was thinking of making a similar post. In my mind, I was fascinated by the nature of the attack by Korihor and how it matches the attacks seen today.

[volgadon]

I have a slightly different take, but interesting list nonetheless.

[Evangeline]

Our teacher today cited a quote from President Benson in our lesson. I looked it up and noticed it was the introductory quote in the Book of Mormon seminary student study guide on Alma chapter 30:

http://seminary.lds.org/manuals/book-of-mormon-seminary-student-study-guide/bm-ssg-07-a2-9-28.asp

President Ezra Taft Benson reminded us that “the Book of Mormon exposes the enemies of Christ. ... 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” ( “The Book of Mormon Is the Word of God,” Ensign, Jan. 1988, 3 ).

[Duncan]

most interesting!

[ShawFanX]

We discussed Alma 30 and Korihor today. I posted my summary of Korihor's teachings on my web page. Here are what I see as the ten foundational claims of Korihor. It is interesting that essentially none of the claims of the New Atheists are, in fact, “new”.

1. Atheistic

“God … never has been seen or known” (28, 37-40, 45, 52-3), or agnostic (48)

2. Denies Christ

“Anti-Christ” (6, 12), “there should be no Christ” (12, 22, 39)

“ye cannot know that there shall be a Christ” (15, 26)

“there could be no atonement made” (17, 26)

rejected the Fall (25)

3. Materialistic and naturalistic presuppositions

belief in spiritual things is irrational “foolish things” (13)

“ye cannot know things which ye do not see” (15, 24)

“belief in things which are not so” (16)

“every man prospered according to his genius” (17)

“when a man is dead that is the end thereof” (18)

“show me a sign” (43-45, 48)

4. Rejects spiritual manifestations as mental instability or lying

belief is the “effect of a frenzied mind” and “derangement of your minds” (16)

rejects “traditions … dreams … whims … visions and … pretended mysteries” (28)

5. Rejection of historicity of scripture

“foolish traditions of your fathers” (14, 16, 23, 27, 31)

belief in “traditions of your fathers” is a “derangement of your minds” (16)

“the traditions of your fathers … are not so” (16)

6. There is no prophecy

preaches “against the prophecies … concerning the coming Christ” (6)

“vain and foolish hope … foolish things” (13)

“no man can know anything which is to come” (13, 22, 24)

7. Publicly attacked Church Leaders (31)

Church leaders “usurp power and authority over” the people (23)

Church leaders want to “keep [the people] in ignorance” (23)

Church leaders “keep [the people] down in bondage” (27, 23, 24, 28)

Church leaders “glut [them]selves with the labor of [the people] hands” (27, 31)

Church leaders “deceive this people” (35)

the Church “have all gone astray after an unknown god” (53)

8. Mocked Church rituals

rejected “foolish ordinances” (23)

9. Denies the existence of sin = amoral

“whatsoever a man did was no crime” (17)

“commit whoredoms” (18), “pleasing to the carnal mind” (53)

10. Attempted to convert others to their beliefs

“leading away the hearts of many” (18)

“perverting the ways of the Lord” (22, 60)

“leading away the hearts of the people” (45)

“lying and … flattering words” (47)

I think this is a pretty good decoction of the fundamental orientation. The devil, however, is, as always, in the details, and the details, based upon my long past experience here, may get the thread locked.

Edited July 23, 2012 by ShawFanX

[ANACO]

Ecclesiastes 1: 9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

Just a thought - kind regards.

[cdowis]

I remember Benson's comment on how Korihor was giving arguments against God and religion. So I decided to conduct an experiment to see how well they match actual atheist thinking and arguments by formulating them into modern language, and I posted them in a forum where disbelievers held discussions.

They basically agreed that these arguments pretty much summarized their thoughts on God and religion.

This is not some religious person pretending how atheists argue, but the real thing. Korihor was a real person, using real arguments. Note the influence of Darwinism in those arguments -- the strong will survive, and that is the natural order of things.

[Calm]

Note the influence of Darwinism in those arguments

Huh? Edited July 23, 2012 by calmoriah

[volgadon]

Huh?

Darwinism says hi from Presentism.

[ANACO]

Huh?

Survival of the fittest:

...but every man^afared in this life according to the management of the creature; therefore every man prospered according to his genius, and that every man conquered according to his strength

The Origin of Species Chapter 3: Struggle for Existence

"Struggle for life most severe between individuals and varieties of the same species; often severe between species of the same genus"

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/origin/chapter3.html

No afterlife:

telling them that when a man was dead, that was the end thereof

Quite the survivor, wasn't he?

(Korihor) was run upon and trodden down, even until he was dead.

[ShawFanX]

Darwinism says hi from Presentism.

Darwinism has, indeed, always been a problem during the 20th century, as most of the worst anti-human philosophies of the age have been, to one degree or another, predicated upon it. The problem with evolutionary biology is not evolutionary biology per se (the mechanics of the development of organic life on earth), but two things: the extension of evolutionary biology as an explanatory framework beyond physical organic systems to virtually everything else, and to ultimate origins.

In that, Korihor was probably, though he knew nothing of Darwin, ahead of his time in thinking that man is really nothing more than a very clever animal. In point of fact, whatever Korihor's views of man's origins, his overall philosophy is far closer to Nietzsche than to Darwinism pre se.

Edited July 23, 2012 by ShawFanX

[Duncan]

Darwinism says hi from Presentism.

I can see Darwinians making those claims- "every man fared in this life according to the management of the creature; therefore every man prospered according to his genius" if you get sick and have no money too bad or you can't find a job, too bad, no social safety nets in place to help out

[Calm]

Sure, but it was the comment of "influence of Darwinism" on Korihor's arguments that gave me pause.

[volgadon]

Has anyone considered that there might be more to the terms "creature" and "genius" than a presentist reading reacting to social Darwinism?

[Duncan]

Has anyone considered that there might be more to the terms "creature" and "genius" than a presentist reading reacting to social Darwinism?

capitalism?

[ANACO]

Has anyone considered that there might be more to the terms "creature" and "genius" than a presentist reading reacting to social Darwinism?

Why would it be a presentist reading of Korihor's teachings, of Korihor who preceded Darwin?

Was not Darwin mimicking Korihor? Was not Darwin influenced from below as was Korihor who preceded Darwin?

Does not The Book of Mormon contains false teachings of the past to warn us of false teachings of today?

If that's presentism, or false interpretations of the past, then why the need for the Book of Mormon?

[WalkerW]

Allen, lay out your view. I remember you talking about it a good while ago. You saw it not as theism vs. atheism, but as a dispute over Yahweh's power. Brant Gardner has a similar view.

[ANACO]

Korihor:

Now Korihor said unto him: I do not deny the existence of a God, but I do not believe that there is a God; and I say also, that ye do not know that there is a God; and except ye show me a sign, I will not believe. Alma 30:48

Darwin:

though reticent about his religious views, in 1879 he wrote that "I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. – I think that generally ... an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin#Religious_views

Agnostic: "In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively.." (wikipedia)

Both Darwin and Korihor were agnostic, it appears.

[ERayR]

Darwinism says hi from Presentism.

I think he is saying Darwin's ideas were not new, he just did a better job of spreading them.

[volgadon]

Allen, lay out your view. I remember you talking about it a good while ago. You saw it not as theism vs. atheism, but as a dispute over Yahweh's power. Brant Gardner has a similar view.

I've since refined my thoughts a little, especially sitting in Sunday School, but the gist is that Korihor believes that there is a God. What he doesn't believe is that God involves himself in the world of His creations, nor that He directs its destiny. This is why there is no retribution, no atonement for sins, and no messiah to fulfill either role. This is why Alma marshals as evidence the earth and all on it moving in their proper form. Korihor seems to believe in angels and other entities as active forces in the world. This is what I'm getting at with suggesting a closer reading of "creature" and "genius." I'm also not so sure that he rejected scripture, but rather its interpretation according to "tradition."

[volgadon]

I think he is saying Darwin's ideas were not new, he just did a better job of spreading them.

I don't think the verse is at all about Darwinism.

[The Grimace]

Zarahemla claimed religious freedom. If this was the case, why was Korihor brought before Alma?

[Calm]

Zarahemla claimed religious freedom. If this was the case, why was Korihor brought before Alma?

9 Now this man went over to the land of Jershon also, to preach these things among the people of Ammon, who were once the people of the Lamanites.

And he came over into the land of Gideon, and began to preach unto them also; and here he did not have much success, for he was taken and bound and carried before the high priest, and also the chief judge over the land.

they delivered him up into the hands of the officers, and sent him to the land of Zarahemla, that he might be brought before Alma, and the chief judge who was governor over all the land.

blaspheme.

It would appear that each time they merely escorted him to the borders of their jurisdiction as an undesirable. If they were living the law of Moses as it is said in verse 3, blasphemy would be a crime, wouldn't it? Plus he was taken before a judge, perhaps it was only a hearing to see if he was in violation of some law or not. He was also slandering the priests and judges...don't know if that would count at the time. Edited July 23, 2012 by calmoriah

[WalkerW]

I've since refined my thoughts a little, especially sitting in Sunday School, but the gist is that Korihor believes that there is a God. What he doesn't believe is that God involves himself in the world of His creations, nor that He directs its destiny. This is why there is no retribution, no atonement for sins, and no messiah to fulfill either role. This is why Alma marshals as evidence the earth and all on it moving in their proper form. Korihor seems to believe in angels and other entities as active forces in the world. This is what I'm getting at with suggesting a closer reading of "creature" and "genius." I'm also not so sure that he rejected scripture, but rather its interpretation according to "tradition."

Almost like a Mesoamerican deist, but with even less teleology.