All Are Alike Unto God

In a podcast I listened to yesterday, Dr. Jan Martin spoke about the difficult passages in 2 Nephi 5 and opened my eyes to other possible interpretations different from the traditional one. The text reads as follows, speaking about the Lamanites: “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. And thus saith the Lord God: I will cause that they shall be loathsome unto thy people, save they shall repent of their iniquities” (2 Nephi 5:20-22). The traditional understanding of this is that the Lord actually changed the skin pigmentation of the Lamanites to become darker than that of the Nephites. But, as Dr. Martin suggested, that is not the only valid interpretation. Here are four others that she offered: 

·         Metaphorical: “Scholars who've looked at the use of white in the Book of Mormon have found that in every instance it's used metaphorically, and it refers to purity and the mount of revelation or the amount of light and understanding somebody has, and that this actually isn't a reference to skin pigmentation. In like terms, they've often looked at skin of blackness as metaphorical. So this is not a reference to someone's skin tone.”

·         Clothing: “There's an argument that this might be a reference to clothing, that the skin is animal skin, not human skin, and that the Lamanites are dressing in a particular way to suggest that they're not part of the Nephite culture, and that they do things differently than the Nephites, which is an interesting argument.”

·         Skin Paint: “There's also scholars who've been arguing that this is skin paint, that they're painting themselves. Again, to indicate that they're from a different group, and that they're separate from the Nephites” (here is one article arguing this).

·         Tatoo: “And then one of the things that I argue with the covenant perspective, is that this is possibly tattooing, and that the Lamanites want to identify themselves as separate from Jehovah. And they create an identity through a tattoo that the minute you see them, you know that they're not part of the covenant, and that they've done that on purpose to separate themselves from their Nephite brothers and sisters.” 

Those are all viable explanations for what this “mark” was that the Lamanites had upon them. The more I consider it, the more it makes sense to me that this was some kind of self-inflicted mark. Nephi’s language that “the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them” does not preclude the possibility still that the Lamanites did it to themselves. This is exactly what happened later to the Amlicites: “Now we will return again to the Amlicites, for they also had a mark set upon them; yea, they set the mark upon themselves, yea, even a mark of red upon their foreheads…. Now the Amlicites knew not that they were fulfilling the words of God when they began to mark themselves in their foreheads; nevertheless they had come out in open rebellion against God; therefore it was expedient that the curse should fall upon them” (Alma 3:13, 18). They purposefully marked themselves with some kind of red on their foreheads to distinguish themselves from the Nephites and possibly the Lamanites as well. The Nephites had no mark, the Lamanites had a dark mark, and so the Amlicites chose to use a red mark. The mark could have been a kind of tatoo or paint similar to what the Lamanites were doing with a black mark. Dr. Martin explained further why her idea of this mark being a tatoo makes sense: “In Egyptian there is no hieroglyph for tattoo. So you can't explain it with its own image…. Egyptian is hieroglyphic, meaning you're writing with pictures. There is no word for tattoo. One of my arguments is, well try being Nephi and explaining what happened when you don't have a word to use…. What would you describe it as inlaying the color of black into your skin? A skin of blackness. So we may just be dealing with a difficulty in expressing the idea here, and Nephi is doing his best. And when we translate it into English, it comes out as the skin of blackness, and then we interpret it from our racially motivated perspective, as something that maybe he never intended it to mean.”

                Though we likely will never know exactly what Nephi meant by “skin of blackness” or what this mark upon the Lamanites really was, what is important is that there are credible, well-researched explanations that suggest it had nothing to do with skin pigmentation. Rather than defaulting to a kind of racist understanding, we should focus on the universality of the Book of Mormon’s message found in so many other passages, such as this one from the same Nephi: “It must needs be that the Gentiles be convinced also that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God; And that he manifesteth himself unto all those who believe in him, by the power of the Holy Ghost; yea, unto every nation, kindred, tongue, and people, working mighty miracles, signs, and wonders, among the children of men according to their faith” (2 Nephi 26:12-13). Or as Abinadi declared, “And now I say unto you that the time shall come that the salvation of the Lord shall be declared to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people” (Mosiah 15:28). Or as Mormon wrote, “All people, and all kindreds, and all nations and tongues shall stand before God, to be judged of their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil—If they be good, to the resurrection of everlasting life” (3 Nephi 26:4-5). All of us who have ever lived upon the earth will stand to be judged of God, not according to our race or skin color or culture, but according to our own individual works. Indeed, as Nephi unequivocally declared, “[The Lord] doeth that which is good among the children of men; and he doeth nothing save it be plain unto the children of men; and he inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile” (2 Nephi 26:33). If “black and white” here does reference actual skin pigmentation as we use the terms today, then it provides one more strong evidence that 2 Nephi 5:21 was not referring to true skin color for the simple reason that Nephi did not call the Lamanites black in that passage. Using a different, somewhat awkward phrase of “skin of blackness” suggests that he was trying to say something else just as Dr. Martin argued. What we can say unequivocally and most importantly is what Nephi was perfectly clear on: “All are alike unto God.”