This article is part of a series on Contradictions between the Book of Mormon and the Bible. Click on the link to access a brief overview of the series. 

The Book of Mormon consistently describes righteous people as “white” as well as “fair” or “beautiful” (1 Nephi 11:13, 15; 13:15; 2 Nephi 5:21; 30:6; Jacob 3:8; 3 Nephi 2:15–16; 3 Nephi 19:25, 30; Mormon 9:6; cf. 4 Nephi 1:10). Wicked people are cursed by God with “a skin of blackness” (2 Nephi 5:21), their “skins” becoming “dark,” and the people also “loathsome” and “filthy” (1 Nephi 12:20; Jacob 3:9; Alma 3:6; Mormon 5:15). The Book of Mormon also teaches that the skins of the Nephites or the Lamanites could be changed from white to dark or the reverse depending on their faith and conduct. On this basis, it warns the white-skinned Nephites not to revile the Lamanites for their dark skin (Jacob 3:8–9; 3 Nephi 2:15–16; Mormon 9:6). In this context, the statement that the Lord “denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female” (2 Nephi 26:33) does not deny that black skin is a curse, but rather it promises that God will accept black people who “come unto him.” Again, the “curse” of black or dark skin is reversible, according to the Book of Mormon; nevertheless, it is a curse. It was also a “mark” that God placed on the wicked Lamanites to warn Nephites not to intermarry with them, lest they come under the same curse (2 Nephi 5:23; Alma 3:8–17).¹

LDS author David Belnap claims that a mere eight verses have been interpreted as teaching a racist view of dark-skinned people (1 Ne. 11:13; 13:15; 2 Ne. 5:21; Jacob 3:5, 8–9; Alma 3:6; 3 Ne. 2:15).² In fact, this idea has been found in some 26 verses of the Book of Mormon (1 Ne. 11:13, 15; 12:23; 13:15; 2 Ne. 5:21–23; 30:6; Jacob 3:5, 8–9; Alma 3:6–10, 14–16; 3 Ne. 2:15–16; 3 Ne. 19:25, 30; 4 Ne. 1:10; Mormon 5:15; 9:6). Whatever these texts mean, they are a significant part of the Book of Mormon narrative.

Mormon interpretation of these Book of Mormon texts in recent years has focused on circumventing their plain meaning, an irony in view of the Book of Mormon’s repeated claim to be written plainly (e.g., 2 Nephi 25:4–7, 20, 28). Belnap claims that the Book of Mormon encourages no racist attitudes, but this claim is refuted by the Book of Mormon’s own explanation that the mark of dark skin was intended to make its bearers “loathsome” to fair-skinned people (1 Ne. 12:23; 2 Ne. 5:22; Mormon 5:15). Many LDS scholars have agreed that these statements indicate that the curse was racial, as Belnap grudgingly admits, among them John L. Sorenson, Richard L. Bushman, and Royal Skousen.³

Those LDS authors who deny any racial meaning to these Book of Mormon texts differ considerably among themselves as to what the texts do mean. Some take the texts literally but claim that they refer to tattoos⁴ or to dark clothing.⁵ Another theory that attempts to take the texts literally is that they refer to the darkened appearance of people who are close to death, perhaps because they are deathly ill.⁶ These interpretations all focus on one or two of the Book of Mormon texts but don’t account adequately for all of the relevant passages.

Other LDS authors favor a metaphorical interpretation of all of the debated Book of Mormon statements. In this approach, “white” or “fair” refers to something like righteousness and “black” or “dark” refers to something like wickedness. But this approach to the texts just doesn’t work. For example, regarding 1 Nephi 11:15, which describes Mary as “most beautiful and fair above all other virgins,” Belnap comments, “Certainly God cared about the spiritual beauty of his son’s mother-to-be, not her physical appearance.”⁷ Of course, Mary’s outward beauty is thought to reflect her inner beauty, but the text still plainly means that she was outwardly the most beautiful of virgins. Metaphorical interpretations work only to some extent because the outward darkness or blackness of the Lamanites’ skin was understood to be emblematic of their inner spiritual darkness.

One might argue (though Mormons today do not) that the Book of Mormon’s narrative comments about righteous people being white and wicked people being black or dark do not directly contradict the Bible. (Mormons today don’t make this argument because they don’t wish to defend a racial understanding of the Book of Mormon.) Frankly, that conclusion would only hold because the Bible says essentially nothing about skin color! Indirectly, however, the Bible presents a truly “colorblind” view of humanity. All human beings are made in “the image of God” (Genesis 1:26–27; 9:6); God “made of one blood all nations of men” (Acts 17:26 KJV). People of all nations, regardless of race or ethnicity, are under the same “curse” due to sin. That universal curse consists of alienation, suffering, and death, not of changes to skin color or physical appearance. No biblical passage even hints that persons, groups, or nations that become wicked will have darker skin or that those who become righteous will be given white skin. Genesis presents all nations as having descended from Adam through Noah in what is commonly called the Table of Nations (Genesis 10), with no reference whatsoever to their skin colors. The renewing of people in God’s image that comes through union with Christ is not about changing their skin color but about their moral and spiritual perfection, their bodies becoming immortal and incorruptible, and ultimately about their full glorification (Romans 8:29; 1 Corinthians 15:49; 2 Corinthians 3:17–18; Colossians 3:10).

Oddly, we do have one passage from an unexpected place in the Bible that indirectly contradicts the Book of Mormon’s statements on this matter. It comes from the Song of Solomon:

I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem,
As the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon.
Look not upon me, because I am black,
Because the sun hath looked upon me (Song of Sol. 1:5–6a).

The word “black” (the literal meaning of the Hebrew shahor) refers not to the bride’s race or natural skin color but to her skin having darkened after laboring outside for a long time under the hot sun, as verse 6 makes clear. Nevertheless, the bride claims that despite her darkened skin she is still pretty. It certainly is no indication of a lack of faith or good conduct. One commentator puts the matter very nicely:

But in fact, her dark skin is a sign of her good character. For she had worked hard under the hot rays of the sun day after day without protection. Bullied by her brothers (or step-brothers), she had slaved in the family vineyards to the neglect of the ‘vineyard’ of her own skin. She requests that they do not judge her by her skin, for beauty is more than skin-deep. She has a loveliness underneath all that sun-tanned skin which is an example to any modern girl.⁸

We conclude that the Book of Mormon’s teachings about dark or black skin contrasted with white skin implicitly contradict the consistently colorblind teaching of the Bible and indirectly contradicts the sentiment expressed in Song of Solomon 1:5–6.