Dark Skins of the Lamanites

[rameumptom]

As I read my scriptures today, I came across the following in Alma 3:

5 Now the heads of the Lamanites were shorn; and they were naked, save it were skin which was girded about their loins, and also their armor, which was girded about them, and their bows, and their arrows, and their stones, and their slings, and so forth.

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.

Something I'd never noticed before, but when they describe the skin of the Lamanites being dark, was it their actual skin, or the skin which was girded about their loins? Look at the Amlicites, who joined them later. They began dressing like the Lamanites, and marked themselves with red on the foreheads for a curse. But it wasn't a dark/black mark. It was a form of tattooing or dress to fit in with the others.

Personally, I think that a literal dark skin curse is a bad read. I think that what I just brought up is as possible as the reading many do to justify the "curse" on the Lamanites. Their curse was a curse because they had rejected God, and it had affected them in many ways of life (war-like, indolent at times, etc). But we see that today. People aren't getting dark skin due to their sinful lifestyles. But they are dressing up in wicked ways, including tattoos, piercings, and extreme clothing. This is the modern sign of a curse, IMO. And it helps to separate people. You can tell a missionary from his dress. You can also tell others by their dress.skins, as well.

Edited June 18, 2009 by rameumptom

[FunkyTown]

Could be, Rame. Good find. I'll look in to it.

[Hemidakota]

As I read my scriptures today, I came across the following in Alma 3:

Something I'd never noticed before, but when they describe the skin of the Lamanites being dark, was it their actual skin, or the skin which was girded about their loins?

Personally, I think that a literal dark skin curse is a bad read. I think that what I just brought up is as possible as the reading many do to justify the "curse" on the Lamanites. Their curse was a curse because they had rejected God, and it had affected them in many ways of life (war-like, indolent at times, etc). But we see that today. People aren't getting dark skin due to their sinful lifestyles. But they are dressing up in wicked ways, including tattoos, piercings, and extreme clothing. This is the modern sign of a curse, IMO. And it helps to separate people. You can tell a missionary from his dress. You can also tell others by their dress.skins, as well.

‘AND’ is the key for Alma in his writing of added thought and not related to loin skins. It was not the color change representing the animal skin which was girded about their loins but a change in coloration of skin.

I always wonder how long it really took for the change to occur. A day? A week? A month? Or, was it the next generation? What out the aid of a daily journal of the prophets, I it could be sometime. Notable, how did they know they change had occur for the Lamanites? When the Lamanites discovered the secreted city of operations?

I don’t know why Alma uses the term curse for skin pigmentation changes when we review what happened to Cain and his family.

Our friend John Millet, BYU, discussed the interruption of these versus as the following:

6-9. Because of their disobedience and their refusal to follow the counsel and direction of the prophets, a curse had come upon the Lamanites. The mark of that curse was a dark skin, whereby they might be known and distinguished so that the Nephites might not mix with them and assume their way of life (see 1 Nephi 2:23; 2 Nephi 5:21-24)

10. Was called under that head] After a period of time in Book of Mormon history, lineal descent becomes virtually irrelevant. Basically, Nephites are those who give heed to the prophets, and Lamanites are those who refuse to do so.

13. There should be no confusion here. God set the mark of the dark skin upon the Lamanites, while the people of Amlici marked themselves with red.

19. They brought upon themselves the curse] "Just as obedience and righteousness bring blessings, so wickedness and rebellion result in cursings. . . . Cursings are the opposite of blessings, and the greater the opportunity given a people to earn blessings, the more severe will be the cursings heaped upon them, if they do not measure up and gain the proffered rewards." (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 175.) Essentially we bring the cursings of God upon ourselves whenever we fail to qualify for the blessings- the protecting power of the Almighty and the guidance and direction of his Spirit.

I would use the term of correction here to read, a mark but not a curse for the change in the Lamanites genetics profile. Edited June 18, 2009 by Hemidakota

[glow_inthe_dark_girl]

there are different interpretations of the scripture, since Im from Mexico thats a wide known scripture like everybody talks about it, to me is similar to those statements about black people curse, mexican or latinamerican ancestors have dark skin, and we have inherit some of that so we wonder if that means we are cursed for a transgression of somebody else, that would be like adams transgression, but we dont take it as a curse, well, at least the people I know.. some of the authorities such as the seventies that had come say that they think its something symbolic, although the verses appear to b clear about the skin... anyways I dont think is like a big deal, at the end what is going to matter is not our skin color but the acts we did..

[Vort]

As I read my scriptures today, I came across the following in Alma 3:

[...]

Something I'd never noticed before, but when they describe the skin of the Lamanites being dark, was it their actual skin, or the skin which was girded about their loins? Look at the Amlicites, who joined them later. They began dressing like the Lamanites, and marked themselves with red on the foreheads for a curse. But it wasn't a dark/black mark. It was a form of tattooing or dress to fit in with the others.

Good thought, but I think you're missing the mark (no pun intended :)). 2 Nephi 5:20-21 reads:

Wherefore, the word of the Lord was fulfilled which he spake unto me, saying that: Inasmuch as they will not hearken unto thy words they shall be cut off from the presence of the Lord. And behold, they were cut off from his presence. And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.

From these verses, we learn a few things:

• The Lamanites were cursed because they refused to hearken to God's voice.
• Their cursing was that they were cut off from the presence of the Lord.
• The "skin of blackness" was given them to protect the covenant people, "that they might not be enticing" to the Nephites.

The last point demonstrates that the "skin of blackness" per se was not the curse, but more properly was a mark of the curse. This is made explicit in Alma 3:7 (see also verse 14 for God's view of the matter). In that sense, it was not unlike the mark given to Cain and his descendants, which has traditionally been associated with dark skin.

I would note here that the Nephite prophets apparently didn't make this distinction, at least not explicitly. Jacob talked about "the cursing which hath come upon their skins" (Jacob 3:5), while Alma (or more likely Mormon) called the dark Lamanite skin a curse in Alma 3:6, noting in verse 9 that the Nephite who "did mingle his seed with that of the Lamanites did bring the same curse upon his seed", an obvious reference to skin color inheritance.

Personally, I think that a literal dark skin curse is a bad read.

You are drawing a distinction which the Nephite prophets appeared not to have bothered with. For what it's worth, I happen to agree that dark skin is not "cursed", but I think it's important to recognize that the viewpoint we have come to accept is not identical to the viewpoint of the ancients. They apparently considered the dark skin a curse and referred to it as such, even if we recognize otherwise. (Our recognition is confirmed by the previously mentioned wording in Alma 3:14: "Thus the word of God is fulfilled, for these are the words which he said to Nephi: Behold, the Lamanites have I cursed, and I will set a mark on them...")

As Moroni writes later in Mormon 8 and 9:

And whoso receiveth this record, and shall not condemn it because of the imperfections which are in it, the same shall know of greater things than these...Condemn me not because of mine imperfection, neither my father, because of his imperfection, neither them who have written before him; but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been.

I personally do not see any need to avoid acknowledging the obvious: The Nephites considered the Lamanites' dark skin to be a part of the curse of God upon them. I also don't see any need to avoid believing what I think is almost as obvious: The Lamanites' skin color itself was not the curse, regardless of how the ancient Nephites may have thought about the matter.

Edited June 18, 2009 by Vort

[Misshalfway]

Ram does it again! The ball is out of the ballpark!!!

Good eye, Ram. :)

[Just_A_Guy]

For my part, I suspect that there were already people here when the Nephites/Lamanites arrived; and that the Lamanites were willing to intermarry with them whereas the Nephites were not. If the previous inhabitants of the Americas had a different complexion, this would naturally influence the Lamanites over the course of a few generations. It would also explain why it was so important that the Lamanites and Nephites not mix--IIRC, the Mosaic code in-force during early Nephite history prohibited the faithful from marrying non-Israelites.

My "intermarriage with the natives" theory would also explain why the Lamanites outnumbered the Nephites for most of Nephite history.

[Hemidakota]

Concur...since the Jaredites may had move south from the civil strifes. Or perhaps those who were given the land of South America move northward. :)

Edited June 18, 2009 by Hemidakota

[Vort]

JAG, I agree with your suppositions. An open question for me is whether the dark-skin mark of the curse was a generational inheritance, or whether God actually caused dark pigmentation in the first generation of those who turned from God. I'm a bit more partial to the former, more naturalistic explanation, but the Book of Mormon itself seems to suggest the latter.

[Just_A_Guy]

Well . . . assuming that Lehi's family actually wasn't all that "white" to begin with, and assuming Laman and Lemuel started dressing the way Arnold Friberg portrays them . . . I can see it happening quite quickly. :)

[Traveler]

There may be another possibility - Note that the Laminates were nicked. This whole thing may have been a matter of a sun tan. In Japan many women never expose their skin to the sun and as a result are very white skinned despite their dark hair and eyes.

However, I would caution against speculating. Especially concerning the classification of peoples as cursed. I believe this to be a rather vicious heresy that is more likely to generate prideful arrogance and disrespect than love, understanding and compassion. I believe that in our day and time there are no cursed peoples that uphold family values and hold their children and generations to be above their own selfish wants, desires, passions and pleasures.

The Traveler

[ruthiechan]

Traveler, the Prophet Jacob would seem to agree with you.

Jacob Chapter 3

5 Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father—that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them.

6 And now, this commandment they observe to keep; wherefore, because of this observance, in keeping this commandment, the Lord God will not destroy them, but will be merciful unto them; and one day they shall become a blessed people.

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.

[Vort]

There may be another possibility - Note that the Laminates were nicked.

Maybe dull razors were part of the curse on the laminates, and other flooring types as well?

This whole thing may have been a matter of a sun tan.

Extremely unlikely, imo. Suntans were very well-known to the ancients; the darkening of skin from sun exposure could never have been mistaken as a divinely-placed curse on a whole people.

[Moksha]

Rameumpton, perhaps that curse business was just a misunderstanding on the part of that Nephite author as to the true origins and mechanisms for producing a variety of skin colors.

[Traveler]

Maybe dull razors were part of the curse on the laminates, and other flooring types as well?

Extremely unlikely, imo. Suntans were very well-known to the ancients; the darkening of skin from sun exposure could never have been mistaken as a divinely-placed curse on a whole people.

Could I take this sarcasm farther? Since the sun is an ancient symbol of divine power – therefore a “sun tan” would be a divine curse that would not only change the color but it time weather the youth out of it? My understanding of Arabic people is that they avoid the sun like the plague and are quite perplexed why we wear short sleeves and short pants exposing all that skin deliberately tanning.

The Traveler

[Hemidakota]

Elder McConkie statement on the "Lamanite Curse" [reference MD]

See APOSTASY, BOOK OF MORMON, NEPHITES AND LAMANITES, RACES OF MEN, SPIRITUAL DEATH. Because they rebelled against the truth, a twofold curse came upon the Lamanites:

1. They were cut off from the presence of the Lord and thus died spiritually. Scales of darkness covered their eyes because they did not accept the saving principles of the gospel. They became apostates and the descendants of apostates. (1 Ne. 2:21-24; 2 Ne. 4:4-6; Alma 9:13-14.)

2. "After they had dwindled in unbelief," that is, after they had forsaken the Church and the gospel, "they became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations." (1 Ne. 12:23.) So that they "might not be enticing" unto the Nephites, "the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them." (2 Ne. 5:20-25; Alma 3:14-16.)

During Book of Mormon times the curse fell upon Laman, Lemuel, the sons of Ishmael, the Ishmaelitish women, the descendants of all these, and upon all who were "led away by the Lamanites," and who mingled their seed with the seed of that people. (Alma 3:6-10.) Then near the close of the 4th century after Christ, Mormon prophesied of yet greater curses to come upon the seed of the then warring nations. "This people shall be scattered, and shall become a dark, a filthy, and a loathsome people, beyond the description of that which ever hath been amongst us, yea, even that which hath been among the Lamanites, and this because of their unbelief and idolatry." (Morm. 5:15; D. & C. 3:16-20.)

During periods of great righteousness, when groups of Lamanites accepted the gospel and turned to the Lord, the curse was removed from them. Thousands of Lamanites were converted "and the curse of God did no more follow them" in the days of Aaron and Ammon and their brethren. (Alma 23:5-9, 17-18.) Some 20 years before the personal ministry of Christ among them, the curse was removed from a group of Lamanite converts and they became white like the Nephites. (3 Ne. 2:15-16.) From the time of Christ's ministry among them until nearly 200 A.D. there were no Lamanites for all had become "the children of Christ, and heirs to the kingdom of God." (4 Ne. 17-20, 38.)

When the gospel is taken to the Lamanites in our day and they come to a knowledge of Christ and of their fathers, then the "scales of darkness" shall fall from their eyes; "and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and delightsome people." (2 Ne. 30:6.) Finally, before the judgment bar of God, all who have been righteous, Lamanites and Nephites alike, will be free from the curse of spiritual death and the skin of darkness. (Jac. 3:5-9.)

Read paragraph number two again....it was not just Alma's viewpoint but Nephi also.

[Moksha]

We know from our biology classes that skin color is not the result of a curse or a blessing.

[bytebear]

We know from our biology classes that skin color is not the result of a curse or a blessing.

And we also know that when two people of different races procreate, the offspring of that union takes on attributes of both parents. To a tribal society, this could easily be interpreted as a curse, particularly if the culture looks negatively on such intermingling.

[Maxel]

We know from our biology classes that skin color is not the result of a curse or a blessing.

And we know from our scriptures that the Lord delivered the nation of Israelites from Egypt by bringing 7 plaugues upon the people of Egypt- including turning rivers to blood. We also know that the Lord delivered the people of Alma (the first) from the Lamanites and Amulonites by causing a deep sleep to come upon the guards. We also know these are but a small portion of the recorded miracles wrought by God.

If the Lord has the power to do all these things, why not change the pigmentation in the skin of a cursed people as a sign of said cursing? It's not beyond the realm of possibility that the Lord directly cuased the skin of the Lamanites to turn dark by changing the pigmentation within their skin.

[deseretgov]

As other's have said. In second Nephi it describes the cursing. The curse was not the dark skin. The dark skin was a sign of the curse. Loathesomenes was also a sign of that curse. The Lamanites were cursed. Then they became darker skinned so that the Nephites would be able to recognize them. They also became loathesome so that the Nephites could recognize them.

However that doesn't mean that dark skin is loathsome. It means that the Lamaites specifically were made to have darker skin. Then they were made to be loathsome to the Nephites.

If you want a verse by verse analysis I can provide it.

We know from our biology classes that skin color is not the result of a curse or a blessing.

Yes. However a Being that can manipulate every particle and energy field in the universe can change the color of someone's skin.

Here's some scriptures that may provide some insight:

Moses 7:8

8 For behold, the Lord shall curse the land with much heat, and the barrenness thereof shall go forth forever; and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people.

Here is speaks of a blackness that came upon the children of Canaan. Earlier in the verse we read that the land was cursed with much heat and barrenness. It is reasonable to conclude that the blackness(a sign of the curse) was a result of the increased sunlight that was te cause of the curse.

Here's another scripture that describes this:

The Song of Solomon 1:5-6

5 I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon.

6 Look not upon me, because I am black, because the sun hath looked upon me: my mother’s children were angry with me; they made me the keeper of the vineyards; but mine own vineyard have I not kept.

Here blackness was a result of the sunlight. But in both of these scriptures the blackness was not a curse but came from the sunlight. I kind of think it was the same with the Lamanites. The curse could possibly be related to increased sunlight. The sunlight would then cause the skin to become darker. Also the loathsomeness described was pretty much laziness. If you've ever been in a place that is hot and humid laziness comes pretty easy too.

[Traveler]

And we also know that when two people of different races procreate, the offspring of that union takes on attributes of both parents. To a tribal society, this could easily be interpreted as a curse, particularly if the culture looks negatively on such intermingling.

There is error in thinking that there are different races in humanity. The fact is that in every human population there is such a great deal of diversity that it is impossible to identify individual races by genetics. For example if tomorrow every blond haired blue eyed human was suddenly removed from the population that within a few thousand years the number of blond haired blue eyed humans would exist in the human population at the same ratios that currently exist.

The Traveler

[deseretgov]

Hmm I always heard blondes were going to become extinct.

But I agree that Race is a cultural creation and not determined by genetics. Yes people have genetic differences, but our classifications of "blacks," "whites," "latinos" is a social construct.

But to correct bytebear. Actually when people mate the dominant genetic characteristics tent to be the ones to be based on to offspring. Brown eyes usually win out over blue eyes. Black or brown hair tends to win out over blonde. The eye color of parents don't mix and form a brownish blue.

[Vort]

There is error in thinking that there are different races in humanity.

Why is it error? It is simply definition.

The fact is that in every human population there is such a great deal of diversity that it is impossible to identify individual races by genetics.

Interesting, then, that medical scientists insist on classifying frequency of many genetic diseases by racial background.

For example if tomorrow every blond haired blue eyed human was suddenly removed from the population that within a few thousand years the number of blond haired blue eyed humans would exist in the human population at the same ratios that currently exist.

Where on earth did you get such a bizarre notion? This is plainly and obviously false. For example, the blond, blue-eyed people were completely removed from the Chinese population many thousands of years ago. Today, there is a vastly smaller proportion of blond, blue-eyed Chinese than blond, blue-eyed Scandinavians.

[Guest Lovely12]

I'm curious to know if the Lamanites and Nephites were actually different skin complexions, then how does one explain Alma 55: 3-9?

Here we have Captain Moroni, I believe, that has found a decendent of Laman amongst the Nephites to go and deceive a guard who was over the nephites. Wouldn't he had stuck out like a "sore thumb" if he was darker (black skin) then the nephites (white skin) he was walking with?

Also, in 1840 Joseph Smith revised the words "white and delightsome" to "pure and delightsome". I believe the prophet did this so readers would not misinterepret. In the later editions of the BOM, there are footnotes that refer you back to "Pure and delightsome" when discussing skin color.

Here is a ref from blacklds.org Ref: John Tvedtnes is associate director of research at the BYU Institute for the Study and Preservation of Ancient Religious Texts

In 1840 the Book of Mormon was "carefully revised by the translator" Joseph Smith and in that edition the words "white and delightsome" were changed to "pure and delightsome." This change seems to reflect the Prophet’s concern that modern readers might misinterpret this passage as a reference to Latter-day racial changes rather than righteousness. Unfortunately for subsequent LDS interpreters, following the Prophet’s death, the changes in the 1840 edition of the Book of Mormon were not carried over into subsequent LDS printings, which were based upon the edition prepared by the Twelve Apostles in Great Britain. Consequently, Latter-day Saints did not reap the benefit of the Prophet’s clarification until it was restored in the 1981 edition of the Book of Mormon. Interpreting this passage as meaning that conversion leads to a change of skin color echo a misinterpretation of the Book of Mormon text rather than an anachronism in the text itself.

Also in 2 Nephi 30:6 where it states "scales of darkness" there is a footnote "b" that indicates TG "Darkness, Spiritual: spiritual blindness".

I believe it is all symbolic and not a literal skin change. Just like one might say, "you have to toughen your skin". We don't really mean that we will make our skin tough.

Just a thought.....

I would go more into detail, but I have to get back to homeschooling my kids!

Edited June 20, 2009 by Lovely12
Clarity

[YellowLight]

Also, in 1840 Joseph Smith revised the words "white and delightsome" to "pure and delightsome". I believe the prophet did this so readers would not misinterepret. In the later editions of the BOM, there are footnotes that refer you back to "Pure and delightsome" when discussing skin color. I believe it is all symbolic and not a literal skin change. Just like one might say, "you have to toughen your skin". We don't really mean that we will make our skin tough.

"... many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a WHITE and a delightsome people." (1830 Edition, p. 117)

"... PURE and delightsome people." (1840 edition)

"...WHITE and delightsome people." (All later translations until 1981)

"... PURE and delightsome people." (1981 translations , II Nephi 30:6)