This week in Come Follow Me, we read 2 Nephi 3-5. My favorite part of this section is Nephi's Lament in 2 Nephi 4. I like it so much that a couple of years ago I took the time to memorize it. It is a lovely example of a Hebrew lament poetry, but that isn't what I am going to talk about today.
Today I want to weigh in on the debate about 2 Nephi 5. This chapter contains the highly controversial passage about the "cursing" mentioned in v 21.
"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 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."
What is Nephi describing here? It is possible they went to bed one night and had light skin and woke up the next morning and they had dark skin, but I don't really think so. That kind of instant and obvious mass miracle is recorded a couple of times in the Old Testament, but if it had happened here wouldn't we have some kind of indication of the Lamanite's response? Wouldn't they have seen the change and realized God was sending them a message? I have to think that the change was subtle so that Nephi saw it as an act of God, but the Lamanites probably didn't. What then is Nephi referring to when he said they had a "skin of blackness"?
Some of the podcasters I listened to suggested that the idea of a black skin is metaphorical; that somehow their countenances changed and they didn't look as blessed or righteous as before. I think the textural evidence suggests that there was some kind of physical change, or else why would Nephi say, "that they might not be enticing unto my people." A metaphorical change would assume that all the people of the Nephites would have been sensitive to the metaphor. Could Nephi be sure that everyone of his people would pick up on the changed countenance, and think "wow, those Lamanites really have a black aura now."
Others suggest that the Lamanites started wearing black animal skins as clothing. That is a possibility, but does someone wear the same thing every day, and would everyone in that society just start to wear the same color? Maybe, but again it seems unlikely.
If they are not wearing black clothes, or have a black aura, what could Nephi be describing? One idea is that the "black" skin came over time a the Lamanites married native peoples that had darker skin than the Lehites. I think there is quite a bit of evidence for this one. In v 23 Nephi says, "cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed." This suggests that: 1. the curse could be associated with intercultural marriage, something that was forbidden under Mosaic law, and 2. That is was passed on genetically. There is additional evidence that if the Lamanites did meet and join with indigenous people they were hunter gatherers. It says in v. 24 "And because of their cursing which was upon them they did become an idle people, full of mischief and subtlety, and did seek in the wilderness for beasts of prey." In contrast, the Nephites established a stationary settlement, only possible with an agrarian culture, "And I did teach my people to build buildings, and to work in all manner of wood, and of iron, ..." (v. 15). Another evidence is that within only a few generations, the Lamanites far outnumber the Nephites (Jarom 1:6). Why would they be more numerous if they hadn't joined with other people and intermarried?
One fault in the argument is that there is really no reason to believe the indigenous people of the Americas were black skinned. Archeology suggest that the inhabitants of the Americas had migrated from northern Asia where skin tone is darker than northern Europeans, but not at all like the black skin of some African peoples. They might have had darker skins than the Lehites, but why would Nephi say they had a skin of "blackness" instead of a skin of "darkness". He might have done so for dramatic and metaphorical impact, but I am not sure "blackness" is more metaphorically expressive than "darkness." Both terms carry a negative association in the Old Testament.
Another possibility that I heard on a podcast was that the Lamanites might have adopted a local custom of tattooing their skin. If there were an indigenous people whose warriors had a tradition of tattooing their skin, and if the Lamanites adopted this practice in order to be incorporated into the society, Nephi could have called the tattoos a "skin of blackness" and considered it unattractive to his people. Of course, tattooing is not passed on genetically through intermarriage, but the practice might have been passed on to descendants of Laman and Lemuel culturally for a long time and any later Nephites joining the culture might have been required to also assume the tattoos.
These are interesting speculations, but in the end, there is no way to resolve the question. We just don't have enough information. It is important, however, to reassert, as church leaders have done over the pulpit and on the church website, that dark skin is not a sign of divine disapprobation. The curse that came on the Lamanites for the disobedience was a separation from the Lord (v. 20). In this specific case there was some kind of side affect of the separation that Nephi described as "skin of blackness" but the skin was not the curse, the separation was the curse.
No comments:
Post a Comment