There ya go – that’s a bit more precise. =)

The church leaders really do believe that dark refers to dark skinned.

I believe you meant “Some church leaders really do believe that dark refers to dark skinned.”

I’m sure many believe it’s literal.

Kimball made the following comments and the church published them. I assume that would mean they agreed with them.

“I saw a striking contrast in the progress of the Indian people … The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation.

“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(Improvement Era, December 1960, pp. 922-23).

I actually think the dark skin is figurative. Analagous to the ‘flint heart’ they also receive. I think it is the opposite of having Christ’s image emerge in one’s countenance, rather than the opposite of being racially white. I think this is a better explanation for the Nephite abhorrance that limits intermingling between groups. I think the use of white, delightsome, on one hand, and dark and loathsome on the other hand are to do with this.

I give as exhibit one, James E Faust, espeically in his older years.
I give as exhibit two, fellow Caucasian Ron Jeremy. (be careful looking up images.)

~