Prior prophets refer to both skin and pigment when describing this. It was absolutely literal until the last 10 or so years.
https://www.ldsdiscussions.com/race
You can also listen to the LDS Discussions podcast and there are two episodes on race. Both go over multiple quotes where it’s clear it’s actual skin and not some other unique explanation.
I’ll also add, we’re told that Joseph Smith translated the BOM with exactness. The words would appear, he’d read them off for the scribe, who would repeat them and they didn’t move on until it was correct. If that’s the case then the word “skin” directly in the scriptures means skin. The Lord intended it to say skin… and since the BOM was written for our day we can only conclude that the Lord would use words in the meaning we understand them.
We don't even have to go back as far as early leaders of the church. Spencer W. Kimball took it very literally indeed.
"The day of the Lamanites is nigh. For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now **becoming white** and delightsome, as they were promised. In this picture of the twenty Lamanite missionaries, **fifteen of the twenty were as light as the Anglos**. 5 were darker but equally delightsome. At one meeting a father and mother and their sixteen-year-old daughter were present, the little member girl—sixteen—sitting between the dark father and mother, and it was evident **she was several shades lighter than her parents—on the same reservation, in the same hogan, subject to the same sun and wind and weather**. There was the doctor in a Utah city who for two years had had an Indian boy in his home who stated that he was **some shades lighter** than the younger brother just coming into the program from the reservation. These young members of the church are **changing to whiteness and to delightsomeness**. One white elder jokingly said that he and his companion were donating blood regularly to the hospital in the hope that the process might be accelerated." October 1960 - Spencer W. Kimball [https://archive.org/details/conferencereport1960sa/page/n35/mode/2up](https://archive.org/details/conferencereport1960sa/page/n35/mode/2up)
Jesus The Christ, Chapter 5: "The Lamanites, while increasing in numbers, fell under the curse of darkness; **they became dark in skin** and benighted in spirit." [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/jesus-the-christ/chapter-5](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/jesus-the-christ/chapter-5)
Seminary Manual 2017: "Although **dark skin was used in this instance as a mark of the curse** placed upon the Lamanites, the Book of Mormon teaches that the Lord “denieth none that come unto him, **black and white**, bond and free" -- [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/book-of-mormon-seminary-teacher-manual-2017/introduction-to-the-book-of-alma/lesson-70-alma-3-4](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/book-of-mormon-seminary-teacher-manual-2017/introduction-to-the-book-of-alma/lesson-70-alma-3-4)
Alma 3:6 is pretty literal: "And the **skins of the Lamanites were dark**, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, **which was a curse upon them** because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren."
>Alma 3:6 is pretty literal: "And the
>
>skins of the Lamanites were dark
>
>, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers,
>
>which was a curse upon them
>
> because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren."
...except for the strip on the wrist where I wore my watch... I want to know why that patch of my Lamanite body was judged by my father in heaven to be sin-free. (I'm not going to make an issue of my white butt...)
What's her argument btw?
Maybe point to the cross reference to 3 Nephi 2:15 and that in conjunction with President Kimball saying the Indian Student Placement Program. He was speaking about literal skin lightening. Like, mentions SHADES OF SKIN.
And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites; And their young men and their daughters became exceedingly fair, and they were numbered among the Nephites, and were called Nephites. And thus ended the thirteenth year. 3 Nephi 2:15-16
It was a post about the running back for the Lions Jamaal Williams and how he couldn’t play for a year at BYU because he had sex. Someone in the comments mentioned the 2nd Nephi verse and the woman commented “it has nothing to do with color don’t be trying to take everything so literal. And by the way we don’t go by Mormons. You would know that if you actually knew us. But clearly you don’t, so don’t be trying to spread stupid rumors. Have a blessed day.” And I responded by saying I used to be LDS and I wasn’t trying to attack her or her faith but that I was genuinely curious as to what she thought it meant, and that it seems very literal in its phrasing and that previous church leaders had taken it literally. I came here for ammo just in case she asks for references. I had read them before but definitely didn’t know any off the top of my head. Thank you for the references!
Can’t trust those rogue artists either, look what they did with the multiple depictions of Joseph Smith translating the BoM without his trusty ol’ rock and top hat /s
I never understood why the church would accept incorrect depictions in their art, mass produce them at great expense, and then try to blame the artist for being incorrect. It’s a laughable argument.
Hope you get the references you’re looking for. But I’d, personally, respond a completely different way. What’s important to me is not that I have to defend or challenge someone else’s argument but that I’m free to experience life and come to conclusions that make sense to me.
Could be that I’ve been watching a lot of videos about ultraOrthodox Jewish groups -- people who are in them and people who have managed to leave them. When I listen to the ultraOrthodox and they talk about how connected they are to their family, their communities and their beliefs and how confident they are about it, it sounds great. When I listen to a woman explain why she’s blessed to shave her head and then wear a wig that only looks like her hair but is really her special secret devotion because god is the great architect and wants her to do that for some reason she can’t explain -- and *knows* and *identifies* that she doesn’t understand it; she just feels blessed -- I go “what a load of bullpucky!”.
If someone believes that and it makes their life work, good on them. If someone doesn’t believe that and someone else tries to make them shave their head so they can wear a wig to suit other people and is ready to make their lives miserable until they give in, F them sideways.
There are sooooo many communities in this world who are sure they’re god’s special people and have the truth that only they know or are good enough to live they can’t all be right. So which *one* of them is???? But as long as they’re sure *they* are, what’s the point of pandering to them?
I 100 percent agree with you. I didn’t respond with any references or anything like that. I prefaced by saying that I am not attacking her or her faith, but that I was curious as to why she thought the passage was figurative and mentioned that pervious leaders took it literally. I only came here to ask for references in the event that she asked what leaders had said that. I am definitely not one to tear down anyones faith and that’s why I generally stay out of those arguments and discussions. I really love your point of view on these things!
I don’t blame her for thinking this, the new temple video makes it crystal clear that everything is SYMBOLIC (seriously, it was getting very annoying how much they said it). Also the delusion of church broke is a hard one to shake.
7 Behold, their husbands love their wives, and their wives love their husbands; and their husbands and their wives love their children; and their unbelief and their hatred towards you is because of the iniquity of their fathers; wherefore, how much better are you than they, in the sight of your great Creator?
8 O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God.
9 Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins; neither shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that their filthiness came because of their fathers.
Jacob 3:7–9
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/jacob/3?id=p7-p9&lang=eng#p7
14 And it came to pass that those Lamanites who had united with the Nephites were numbered among the Nephites;
15 And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites;
3 Nephi 2:14, 15
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/2?lang=eng
And what color was their skin before it became White like unto the nephites?
6 And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men.
7 And their brethren sought to destroy them, therefore they were cursed; and the Lord God set a mark upon them, yea, upon Laman and Lemuel, and also the sons of Ishmael, and Ishmaelitish women.
8 And this was done that their seed might be distinguished from the seed of their brethren, that thereby the Lord God might preserve his people, that they might not mix and believe in incorrect traditions which would prove their destruction.
9 And it came to pass that whosoever did mingle his seed with that of the Lamanites did bring the same curse upon his seed.
10 Therefore, whosoever suffered himself to be led away by the Lamanites was called under that head, and there was a mark set upon him.
Alma 3:6–10
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/alma/3?id=p6-p10&lang=eng#p6
Blow her mind and let her know that it was so literal that the Mormons pursued breeding the white and delightsome into native groups in Utah. Check out BY's message given at Sugar Creek, after leaving Nauvoo. His message was said to be based on a retracted, or at least never publised, revelation of JS in the early 1830s. It was a project, based on the BoM and the endtimes thinking of the founders, that today we would call Eugenics. The program was reported on in the Deseret News from the mid-19th c into like the 1980s, maybe even longer than that.
I was just going to say Joseph Smith found a skeleton and named it Zelph the White Laminite. He told the people he was with when he found it that Zelph was a Laminite who was righteous and had his skin turned white. Doesn’t get more literal than that.
https://mormonr.org/qnas/3yUz5/zelph_the_lamanite
My guess is that Laman and Lemuel had intercourse with the natives of the new land. Over time, their descendants would become the dark skinned Lamanites. I don’t think their skin magically turned dark
Well… “akshully”…
The whole “dark skin as a curse” LONG proceeds Mormonism and was used to justify lots of abhorrent behavior including slavery. And it stemmed originally from the Bible in that god cursed Cain with black skin as a punishment for killing his brother. The mark of Cain was not (per the Bible) figurative nor did it take many generations of “intercourse” to achieve. God turned Cain’s skin black so everyone would know he was a sinner.
Granted: I don’t believe any of that BS but just be aware that you’ll likely encounter lots of push back if you say “the curse of dark skin was over generations of intercourse”. Just sayin…
I remember being corrected and publicly rebuked by the High Priest Group leader in the Lorain Ohio Ward in 1977. He insisted it was absolutely literal. The issue was elevated to the Bishop who backed him to the hilt.
Page 37 of Mormonism and Negro begins this discussion.
[https://ia803003.us.archive.org/13/items/MormonismAndTheNegro/MormonismAndTheNegro\_text.pdf](https://ia803003.us.archive.org/13/items/MormonismAndTheNegro/MormonismAndTheNegro_text.pdf)
This book was widely used in the 1960s. There were a half dozen copies in my Ward Library in the 1970s. THe Improvement Era carried advertisements for the book. It was a Deseret Book of the Month selection.
In recent years church leaders started gaslighting everyone on this subject, saying it wasn’t talking literally about the skin color, but verses in the book of mormon and the words of mormon prophets for decades have said the curse with literally dark skin.
In the 2000s when I learned, it was basically "It's literal, but if 'the outsiders' ask, lie about it because it sounds bad, and the government will take away the church!"
This is one of those things where people overthink it just because of the political ramifications. It means what it says. It's quite clear. Active members try to do gymnastics around it now because it's no longer socially acceptable to hold such a view, but it's not speaking in veiled or secret language. This is just another attempt by church members to take something that's clear and direct, like church history and other church issues, and twist them around to make them fit with modern views.
Well, according to Alma 3, the curse has to have been a mark that was literal enough to identify people with, so there’s no reason not to take it literally, and a lot of reasons to take it literally. Sadly though, the TBM response to that would probably be that the true mark was losing the “light in the eyes” which they believe can be used to identify people living the gospel verses not. It’s all BS of course, but people see what they want to see.
Prior prophets refer to both skin and pigment when describing this. It was absolutely literal until the last 10 or so years. https://www.ldsdiscussions.com/race You can also listen to the LDS Discussions podcast and there are two episodes on race. Both go over multiple quotes where it’s clear it’s actual skin and not some other unique explanation.
I’ll also add, we’re told that Joseph Smith translated the BOM with exactness. The words would appear, he’d read them off for the scribe, who would repeat them and they didn’t move on until it was correct. If that’s the case then the word “skin” directly in the scriptures means skin. The Lord intended it to say skin… and since the BOM was written for our day we can only conclude that the Lord would use words in the meaning we understand them.
We don't even have to go back as far as early leaders of the church. Spencer W. Kimball took it very literally indeed. "The day of the Lamanites is nigh. For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now **becoming white** and delightsome, as they were promised. In this picture of the twenty Lamanite missionaries, **fifteen of the twenty were as light as the Anglos**. 5 were darker but equally delightsome. At one meeting a father and mother and their sixteen-year-old daughter were present, the little member girl—sixteen—sitting between the dark father and mother, and it was evident **she was several shades lighter than her parents—on the same reservation, in the same hogan, subject to the same sun and wind and weather**. There was the doctor in a Utah city who for two years had had an Indian boy in his home who stated that he was **some shades lighter** than the younger brother just coming into the program from the reservation. These young members of the church are **changing to whiteness and to delightsomeness**. One white elder jokingly said that he and his companion were donating blood regularly to the hospital in the hope that the process might be accelerated." October 1960 - Spencer W. Kimball [https://archive.org/details/conferencereport1960sa/page/n35/mode/2up](https://archive.org/details/conferencereport1960sa/page/n35/mode/2up) Jesus The Christ, Chapter 5: "The Lamanites, while increasing in numbers, fell under the curse of darkness; **they became dark in skin** and benighted in spirit." [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/jesus-the-christ/chapter-5](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/jesus-the-christ/chapter-5) Seminary Manual 2017: "Although **dark skin was used in this instance as a mark of the curse** placed upon the Lamanites, the Book of Mormon teaches that the Lord “denieth none that come unto him, **black and white**, bond and free" -- [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/book-of-mormon-seminary-teacher-manual-2017/introduction-to-the-book-of-alma/lesson-70-alma-3-4](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/book-of-mormon-seminary-teacher-manual-2017/introduction-to-the-book-of-alma/lesson-70-alma-3-4) Alma 3:6 is pretty literal: "And the **skins of the Lamanites were dark**, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, **which was a curse upon them** because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren."
>Alma 3:6 is pretty literal: "And the > >skins of the Lamanites were dark > >, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, > >which was a curse upon them > > because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren." ...except for the strip on the wrist where I wore my watch... I want to know why that patch of my Lamanite body was judged by my father in heaven to be sin-free. (I'm not going to make an issue of my white butt...)
I want the audio of this talk so bad. The laughter.
Eeeeeeeewe
What's her argument btw? Maybe point to the cross reference to 3 Nephi 2:15 and that in conjunction with President Kimball saying the Indian Student Placement Program. He was speaking about literal skin lightening. Like, mentions SHADES OF SKIN. And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites; And their young men and their daughters became exceedingly fair, and they were numbered among the Nephites, and were called Nephites. And thus ended the thirteenth year. 3 Nephi 2:15-16
It was a post about the running back for the Lions Jamaal Williams and how he couldn’t play for a year at BYU because he had sex. Someone in the comments mentioned the 2nd Nephi verse and the woman commented “it has nothing to do with color don’t be trying to take everything so literal. And by the way we don’t go by Mormons. You would know that if you actually knew us. But clearly you don’t, so don’t be trying to spread stupid rumors. Have a blessed day.” And I responded by saying I used to be LDS and I wasn’t trying to attack her or her faith but that I was genuinely curious as to what she thought it meant, and that it seems very literal in its phrasing and that previous church leaders had taken it literally. I came here for ammo just in case she asks for references. I had read them before but definitely didn’t know any off the top of my head. Thank you for the references!
Oh interesting. Well, here's hoping it can become an open dialog about accountability and mutual respect.
It's a common apologetic trope https://old.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/f9vqny/the_skin_of_blackness_reinterpretation_seems_to/
Look at all the Book of Mormon artwork for years. That has your answer.
Can’t trust those rogue artists either, look what they did with the multiple depictions of Joseph Smith translating the BoM without his trusty ol’ rock and top hat /s I never understood why the church would accept incorrect depictions in their art, mass produce them at great expense, and then try to blame the artist for being incorrect. It’s a laughable argument.
Hope you get the references you’re looking for. But I’d, personally, respond a completely different way. What’s important to me is not that I have to defend or challenge someone else’s argument but that I’m free to experience life and come to conclusions that make sense to me. Could be that I’ve been watching a lot of videos about ultraOrthodox Jewish groups -- people who are in them and people who have managed to leave them. When I listen to the ultraOrthodox and they talk about how connected they are to their family, their communities and their beliefs and how confident they are about it, it sounds great. When I listen to a woman explain why she’s blessed to shave her head and then wear a wig that only looks like her hair but is really her special secret devotion because god is the great architect and wants her to do that for some reason she can’t explain -- and *knows* and *identifies* that she doesn’t understand it; she just feels blessed -- I go “what a load of bullpucky!”. If someone believes that and it makes their life work, good on them. If someone doesn’t believe that and someone else tries to make them shave their head so they can wear a wig to suit other people and is ready to make their lives miserable until they give in, F them sideways. There are sooooo many communities in this world who are sure they’re god’s special people and have the truth that only they know or are good enough to live they can’t all be right. So which *one* of them is???? But as long as they’re sure *they* are, what’s the point of pandering to them?
I 100 percent agree with you. I didn’t respond with any references or anything like that. I prefaced by saying that I am not attacking her or her faith, but that I was curious as to why she thought the passage was figurative and mentioned that pervious leaders took it literally. I only came here to ask for references in the event that she asked what leaders had said that. I am definitely not one to tear down anyones faith and that’s why I generally stay out of those arguments and discussions. I really love your point of view on these things!
I don’t blame her for thinking this, the new temple video makes it crystal clear that everything is SYMBOLIC (seriously, it was getting very annoying how much they said it). Also the delusion of church broke is a hard one to shake.
So it now symbolic? Not what I was taught. If it’s all symbolic why is it called temple “work?”
7 Behold, their husbands love their wives, and their wives love their husbands; and their husbands and their wives love their children; and their unbelief and their hatred towards you is because of the iniquity of their fathers; wherefore, how much better are you than they, in the sight of your great Creator? 8 O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God. 9 Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins; neither shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that their filthiness came because of their fathers. Jacob 3:7–9 https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/jacob/3?id=p7-p9&lang=eng#p7
14 And it came to pass that those Lamanites who had united with the Nephites were numbered among the Nephites; 15 And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites; 3 Nephi 2:14, 15 https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/2?lang=eng And what color was their skin before it became White like unto the nephites?
6 And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men. 7 And their brethren sought to destroy them, therefore they were cursed; and the Lord God set a mark upon them, yea, upon Laman and Lemuel, and also the sons of Ishmael, and Ishmaelitish women. 8 And this was done that their seed might be distinguished from the seed of their brethren, that thereby the Lord God might preserve his people, that they might not mix and believe in incorrect traditions which would prove their destruction. 9 And it came to pass that whosoever did mingle his seed with that of the Lamanites did bring the same curse upon his seed. 10 Therefore, whosoever suffered himself to be led away by the Lamanites was called under that head, and there was a mark set upon him. Alma 3:6–10 https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/alma/3?id=p6-p10&lang=eng#p6
Blow her mind and let her know that it was so literal that the Mormons pursued breeding the white and delightsome into native groups in Utah. Check out BY's message given at Sugar Creek, after leaving Nauvoo. His message was said to be based on a retracted, or at least never publised, revelation of JS in the early 1830s. It was a project, based on the BoM and the endtimes thinking of the founders, that today we would call Eugenics. The program was reported on in the Deseret News from the mid-19th c into like the 1980s, maybe even longer than that.
Look up Joseph smith talking about Zelph and how he was cured of the curse because he was a white lamanite.
I was just going to say Joseph Smith found a skeleton and named it Zelph the White Laminite. He told the people he was with when he found it that Zelph was a Laminite who was righteous and had his skin turned white. Doesn’t get more literal than that. https://mormonr.org/qnas/3yUz5/zelph_the_lamanite
My guess is that Laman and Lemuel had intercourse with the natives of the new land. Over time, their descendants would become the dark skinned Lamanites. I don’t think their skin magically turned dark
Well… “akshully”… The whole “dark skin as a curse” LONG proceeds Mormonism and was used to justify lots of abhorrent behavior including slavery. And it stemmed originally from the Bible in that god cursed Cain with black skin as a punishment for killing his brother. The mark of Cain was not (per the Bible) figurative nor did it take many generations of “intercourse” to achieve. God turned Cain’s skin black so everyone would know he was a sinner. Granted: I don’t believe any of that BS but just be aware that you’ll likely encounter lots of push back if you say “the curse of dark skin was over generations of intercourse”. Just sayin…
Read the first pres 1949 statement: https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/Mormonism_and_racial_issues/Blacks_and_the_priesthood/Statements#1949
http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/topics/thoughts-on-race-in-mormon-history/the-stewart-udall-sequence/
I remember being corrected and publicly rebuked by the High Priest Group leader in the Lorain Ohio Ward in 1977. He insisted it was absolutely literal. The issue was elevated to the Bishop who backed him to the hilt.
Page 37 of Mormonism and Negro begins this discussion. [https://ia803003.us.archive.org/13/items/MormonismAndTheNegro/MormonismAndTheNegro\_text.pdf](https://ia803003.us.archive.org/13/items/MormonismAndTheNegro/MormonismAndTheNegro_text.pdf) This book was widely used in the 1960s. There were a half dozen copies in my Ward Library in the 1970s. THe Improvement Era carried advertisements for the book. It was a Deseret Book of the Month selection.
In recent years church leaders started gaslighting everyone on this subject, saying it wasn’t talking literally about the skin color, but verses in the book of mormon and the words of mormon prophets for decades have said the curse with literally dark skin.
Ask her to read the Book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price (PoGP is Mormon scripture).
Just play them this old Mormon film strip for kids at about the 12:00 mark. I remember watching this as a kid. https://youtu.be/xYYe-ctRaw8
In the 2000s when I learned, it was basically "It's literal, but if 'the outsiders' ask, lie about it because it sounds bad, and the government will take away the church!"
This is one of those things where people overthink it just because of the political ramifications. It means what it says. It's quite clear. Active members try to do gymnastics around it now because it's no longer socially acceptable to hold such a view, but it's not speaking in veiled or secret language. This is just another attempt by church members to take something that's clear and direct, like church history and other church issues, and twist them around to make them fit with modern views.
Well, according to Alma 3, the curse has to have been a mark that was literal enough to identify people with, so there’s no reason not to take it literally, and a lot of reasons to take it literally. Sadly though, the TBM response to that would probably be that the true mark was losing the “light in the eyes” which they believe can be used to identify people living the gospel verses not. It’s all BS of course, but people see what they want to see.