Chapter 3. Are the Similarities
between Sherem, Nehor, Korihor Too Great?
Three individuals
receive particular attention in the Book of Mormon as opponents to the Nephite
establishment: Sherem (Jacob 7); Nehor (Alma 1); Korihor (Alma 30). They are
characterized by being learned in language, denying Christ, bringing charges
against the Nephite religious leaders, misleading the people, doubting that one
can know the future, denying the scriptures, being asked “believest thou the
scriptures?”, being hesitant to answer (the Nephite leader is hesitant to invoke
the power of God in the face of the challenger’s sign seeking), being accused
of blasphemy, finally offering a confession, suffering an ignominious death—after
which the people return to righteousness. Robert worries that “evidently it
might be urged” that “the same amateurish spirit” does not characterize
these narratives (pp. 266-7; the underlines words were handwritten by Roberts
on the manuscript but erroneously do not appear in the printed version). “Does
it not carry with it,” he queries, “the proof that it is the work of a pious
youth dealing with the very common place stock arguments clumsily put together?”
(p. 271). Roberts should have added Zeezrom to this list (Alma 11-14).
The similarities
between the arguments of Nehor, Zeezrom and Korihor, however, are easy to
explain. Nehor founded a religious order, which, it appears, was most popular
among the Mulekites. Its political power base appears to have been in
Ammonihah, for it was known as the Desolation of Nehors when it was destroyed
in Alma 16. Zeezrom was “after the order and faith of Nehor” (Alma 14:16); and
we know that there were “lawyers, judges, priests and teachers, who were of the
profession of Nehor” also in Ammonihah (Alma 14:18). Korihor is never expressly
said to belong to this order, but it appears quite obvious that he was; his
name may reveal a Mulekite connection, and when he derides Nephite traditions
he does not call them the traditions of “our fathers” but of “your” or “their
fathers” (Alma 30:27, 31). He also comes “into the land of Zarahemla” (30:6)
and tries to convert the Ammonites (30:19), people with whom the Nehors had had
dealings before (24:29). Thus, these three men talk the same because they are
of the same persuasion and training.
Korihor’s arguments
are not shallow: rather they distill virtually every main philosophical,
epistemological, humanistic, economic, psychological or other such argument
generally raised against religion. His case was in fact well briefed and
powerfully argued. See also Chauncy Riddle, “Korihor:
The Arguments of Apostasy,” Ensign, F.A.R.M.S. Reprint RID-77; John Rozier,
“The Trial of Korihor,” F.A.R.M.S. Archive.
Sherem’s interest,
however, is much different. He does not oppose
religion. He is a purist. He wishes to live the law of Moses “which is the
right way,” and resists the interjection of the worship of the future messiah
into the religion (Jacob 7:7). It is Sherem who accuses Jacob of
blasphemy (7:7), not Sherem (like Korihor) who is accused. In effect, Sherem
receives the judgement of God for accusing Jacob falsely. Under Israelite law
false accusers were made to suffer as their accused would have suffered had the
accusation stood up (Deut. 19:16-21). These and many other differences make
Sherem’s case not only distinguishable but more understandable. These ancient
legal concepts behind these trials and other passages in the Book of Mormon
show subtle and important ways in which the Bok of Mormon reflects ancient Near
Eastern culture—ways one would not expect if the book were merely “amateurish.”
Many of the
procedural similarities between these cases can be attributed to ancient
Israelite law. For example, it was normal for the court to seek a confession
before executing a guilty person, whether voluntarily (as in Sherem’s and
Korihor’s cases) or involuntarily (as in Nehor’s case). Publishing the results
of the trial through heralding the case publically (e.g. Alma 30:57) was also
standard ancient legal procedure . . . it is also the case that ancient
histories reported events in patterns, typologies and formulae. Herodotus and
Plutarch do this frequently. One would not expect the Book of Mormon to be both
an ancient text and a totally sophisticated history by modern standards.
(John W. Welch, Finding Answers to B.H. Roberts Questions and “An Unparallel”
pp. 15-16, emphasis in original)
Further Reading
Grant Hardy, Understanding
the Book of Mormon: A Reader's Guide
John W. Welch, The
Legal Cases in the Book of Mormon
Joseph M. Spencer, Is this Not Real?
(on the Korihor incident and its effects on Alma’s preaching)
Brant A. Gardner, Religion
of the Nehors
A. Keith Thompson, Who Was Sherem?
