As a prelude to the introduction of Korihor—the Anti-Christ—the Book of Mormon offers a peculiar insight into Mormonism, possibly explaining why the Church sometimes acts as if it’s above the law in matters of judgment. It also exposes a clear contradiction in the narrative.

The early verses of Alma 30 describe a society not just tolerant of diverse beliefs but accepting of every way of life:

“[N]ow if a man desired to serve God it was his privilege or rather if he believed believed in God it was his privilege to serve him but if he did not believe in him there was no law to punish him” 

Alma 30:9 – The Handwritten Book of Mormon (West Valley City, UT: Dan Wees, August 2017), 383.

Korihor’s words first appear in verse 13. His liberal teachings seemed to provoke an immediate reaction, particularly among women, though men are also mentioned.

The unspoken rule appears to be that belief is freely allowed—unless it leads to actions contrary to the Church. A sentiment that echoes into the modern era.

Without justification, “they took [Korihor], and bound him” (v. 20) and brought him before the high priest. What law permitted this? Was preaching acceptable only if it didn’t encourage independent thought or non-Church-approved choices? How could this form of martial law be reconciled with Joseph Smith’s words? Does this foreshadow the subtle oppression seen in modern Mormonism? Do the faithful overlook legal principles when a non-believer is treated unfairly?

This is a clear error in Joseph Smith’s dictation—never corrected—yet it has significantly influenced unrighteous dominion throughout LDS history.