PBS Special to Air:

I will be looking forward to reviewing this for content.

Jan 14, 2007 4:35 pm US/Mountain
PBS Film Aims To Debunk Myths About Mormonism
SALT LAKE CITY The filmmaker behind a new four-hour documentary about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints said she hopes her work will debunk some myths about the Utah-based church. “I hope that most of the stereotypes ideally, all of them will be blown away,” Helen Whitney told The Deseret Morning News from a television critics gathering in Pasadena, Calif. Saturday. “Because so many of them are just based on ignorance. Ignorance about Mormon history, ignorance about Mormon theology. Ignorance.”

The two-part film called “The Mormons” is a joint presentation from public broadcasting’s “American Experience” and “Frontline.” The “American Experience” segment is expected to air April 30 and cover the church’s history, including its founding, persecutions leading to exodus and polygamy.

The “Frontline” broadcast is planned for May 1. Its focus is the modern church, including missionary work, family life, temples and the elevation of the faith to a mainstream religion. “It is not exhaustive. It is not comprehensive. It is thematic,” said Whitney, who spent three years on the project. “I have chosen what I felt to be the defining ideas and themes and events in Mormon history that would help outsiders go inside the church.”

Whitney worked with Mormon and non-Mormon consultants while making the film. She said she interviewed “hundreds,” from everyday members to church President Gordon B. Hinckley and those antagonistic toward the faith. She also traveled cross country and sent a film crew to Ghana. “Mormons are everywhere, and I wanted to make that point,” she said. “There are more Mormons outside of America than in this country. And even within America, there are many Mormons outside of Utah. So only a small part of it was shot in Utah.”

Whitney, who won both Emmy and Peabody awards for her films profiling monks and Catholic Pope John Paul II, said Mormon church leaders, said the film’s goal is neither to recruit new members to the church, nor discourage its believers.

(© 2007 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. )

Why Don't Latter-day Saints Use Wine in Their Sacrament?

Latter-day Saints emphatically affirm our reliance on the atoning blood of Christ for the remission of sins, as attested to in the bible [Col 1:14; 1 Peter 1:18-19; 1 John 1:7; Rev 7:14] and modern scripture [1 Nephi 12:10; Mosiah 3:7, 11; 4:2; Alma 5:21, 27; 21:9; 24:13; 34:36; Helaman 5:9; Esther 13:10; Moroni 4:1; 5:2; 10:33; D&C 20:40; 27:2; 76:69; Moses 6:62].

Even the sacrament prayer for the administration of the water affirms the symbolism of the atoning blood. It states in part ". . . bless and sanctify this water to the souls that drink of it, that they do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them" [D&C 20:79].

As to our use of water in place of the grape juice [new wine - see Isa 65:8], it is important to note that initially grape juice was used in the sacrament both in the early church [Matt 26:28-29] and in the latter-day Church [D&C 20:79, History of the Church 1:78]. As a precaution against the enemies of the Church poisoning or adulterating the grape juice sold to the Saints, a change was authorized by the Lord [History of the Church 1:106-08; Church History and Modern Revelation, 1:132; Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual, p 55]. The Lord revealed "that it mattereth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the sacrament, if it so be that ye do it with an eye single to my glory- remembering unto the Father my body which was laid down for you, and my blood which was shed for the remission of your sins" [D&C27:2]

It is interesting to note that the command throughout the scriptures was not to partake of the bread and the wine, but the bread and the cup [Matt 26:26-27; Mark 14:22-23; Luke 22:17, 19,20; 1 Cor 11:24-26]. It thereforeappears that it was not the wine that was being empathized but the "bitter cup" [D&C 19:18] of which Christ would partake [Matt 20:22-23; 26:39, 42; Mark 10:38; 14:36; Luke 22:20, 42; John 18:11; 1 Cor 10:21]. This also in conformity with the Old Testament usage of the term "cup" to symbolize suffering [Ps 11:6; 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Jer 25:15, 17, 49:12; see also Jesus the Christ, p. 620, note 8].

It is noteworthy that some early Christians used both water and wine in sacrament. Justin Matyr [ca 140 AD] recorded:

On Sunday we hold a meeting in one place for all who live in the cities or the country nearby. The teachings of the Apostles or the writings of the prophets are read as long as time is available. When the reader has finished, the president gives a talk urging the inviting us to imitate all these good examples. When then all stand together and send up our prayers. As noted before, bread wine and water is brought forth after our prayer. The president also sends up prayers and thanksgiving. The people unitedly give their consent by saying "Amen" The administration takes place, and each one receives what has been blessed with gratefulness. The deacons also administer to those not present . . . We all choose Sunday for our communal gathering because it is the first day, on which God created the universe by transforming the darkness and the basic elements, and because Jesus Christ - our Redeeming Savior - rose from the dead on the same day [First Apology, pp. 65-67; see also Vesal and Wallace, The Firm Foundation of Mormonism, p. 231].

This practice was also mentioned by Pope Julius I [337 AD] in a decree which stated: "But if necessary let the cluster be pressed into the cup and water mingled with it" [Gratian, De Consecratione, Pars III, Dist. 2, c. 7, as cited by Leon C. Field, Oinos: A Discussion of the Bible Wine Question, New York, 1883, p. 91, and Samuele Bacchiocchi, Wine in the Bible, pp. 109-10]. This practice of mixing wine and water may be related to the fact that both blood and water were shed on the cross. John recorded that "one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forth-with came there out blood and water" [John 19:34]. John latter recorded that "there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one" [1 John 5:8]. In like manner baptism by water was also related by Paul to Christ's death [Rom 6:3-5].

Samuele Bacchiocchi, a non-LDS scholar, has observed, "An investigation. . . of such Jewish Christian sects as the Ebionites, the Nazarenes, the Elkesaites, and the Encratites, might provide considerable support for abstinence from fermented wine in the Apostolic Church. The fact that some of these sects went to the extreme of rejecting altogether both fermented and unfermented wine using only water, even in the celebration of the Lord's Supper, suggests the existence of a prevailing concern for in the Apostolic Church" [Wine in the Bible, p. 181]. It also suggests that early Christians understood that "it mattereth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when [partaking] of the sacrament" [D&C 27:2]

Catholic, at a much later period, also substituted the eucharist for the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper, believing that it would literally be turned into the flesh and blood of the Lord. [See James Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of our Fathers, pp. 235-50].

Although the later practice was introduced during a period of apostasy, it nonetheless shows that some Christians felt it was permissible to modify the observance of the sacrament service even without direction of the Lord. The LDS sacrament service, on the other hand, is always observed within the guidelines given by the Lord and as prescribed in the scriptures [see John 6:53-54; Acts 2:46; 20:7; 1 Cor 11:23-30; Moroni 4 and 5; D&C 20:75-79; 27:1-4; and additional information on the LDS reliance on Christ's atonement see Gilbert W. Scharffs, The Truth About "The God Makers", pp. 192-93].

Don't Newly Discovered Manuscripts Prove the Bible Inerrant?

Proponent's of biblical inerrancy often imply that the Dead Sea Scrolls prove that our Bible today has changed very little, even after centuries of recopying. They usually point to the relatively infrequent differences which exist between the Isiah text and Modern Hebrew version of Isaiah. We are also led to believe that the Dead Sea Scrolls prove the accuracy of the entire Old Testament - but this is not the case. Those who try to persuade us to believe these claims ignore some significant details about the Dead Sea Scrolls and other important discoveries made this century. We will first clarify what the Dead Sea Scrolls actually reveal.

Although fragments of all Old Testament books except Esther have been found in 11 Dead Sea caves, most of the 200 Biblical manuscripts which have been identified were not scrolls but fragments of scrolls. Over 80,000 fragments representing seven to eight hundred different manuscripts were found in one cave alone. The work of assembling these fragments has gone on for more than 40 years and will probably continue another 40 years.

At the time of the initial discovery, seven major scrolls were made available to scholars. Within ten years of their discovery a translation of these scrolls was also made available. This included a translation of a compete Isaiah Scroll originally recorded on leather - the only complete Bible book found. A second partial Isaiah scroll was also among these seven scrolls. The other five scrolls contained the Habakkuk Commentary, the Manual of Discipline, the Thanksgiving Hymns, and War Scroll [also known as the War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness], and the Genesis Apocryphon [See Vernon W. Jattson Jr. , The Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Important Discoveries, pp. 13-14]. Two or more or less compete Bible Scrolls have since been added to the Isaiah scrolls: a Psalm scroll and an Aramaic Job scroll.

The remainder of the Old Testament is represented only by fragments and will never be totally complete. No New Testament books, of course, were found in any of the Dead Sea caves. Although translations of the more complete scrolls were quickly made available to all, the fragmented manuscripts have only recently been published and made available. What has been published indicates that the Qumran library contained a canon which is not identical to traditional Judaism but which instead preserved a "variety of textual traditions" [Geza Verms, Dead Sea Scrolls - Qumran in Perspective, pp. 204-06].

The two Isaiah scrolls are typical of the variety fond in the rest of the manuscripts. One scroll corresponds to the Modern Hebrew Bible while the other corresponds more closely to the Masoretic or traditional Hebrew text relied upon heavily by King James scholars. Detailed examination of the Dead Sea Scroll Isaiah texts leads up to conclude that although these two Isaiah manuscripts were undoubtedly preserved by God for the last 2000 year, they were not as well preserved by man from 700 BC to 200 BC [the time the Qumran texts were produced]. Otherwise, there would not have been two very different versions after the first 500 years.

Proponents of biblical inerrancy seldom mention that scholars have found evidence of an effort by ancient scribes to eliminate discrepancies by comparing three model texts and "choosing as official and binding the reading attest by at least two of the model scrolls. Thereafter, every text which departed from the canonized scripture was held to be an unauthorized version" [Ibid, 208-09]. This might explain how so many later texts were said to have matched, even though they consistently contained obvious contradictions and errors.

We should further note that among the writings discovered at Qumran, there were about five times more non biblical texts as there were biblical texts, and yet many of the non biblical texts appear to have been valued as highly as modern scriptures. Today many of these valued texts are classified as apocryphal and pseudepigraphal writings. While the words such as Jubilees, the Testament of Levi, the Book of Enoch and other found at Qumran have proven their antiquity and their value to understanding the inter-Testamental period, they remain largely ignored by modern Christianity.

The discoveries of Jewish writings at Qumran were quickly followed by discoveries of previous unknown Jewish and Christian writings at other Middle East locations. These included the discovery of the Nag Hammadi library in Egypt, fifteen thousand clay tablets at Ebla, gold and silver tablets at Persepolis, manuscripts at Masada, and others. Hugh Nibley noted some twenty important manuscript finds between 1844 and 1947 in his book Since Cumorah pages 52 and 53. Through these finds, the world has been provided with an unblemished and unaltered record of early Christian beliefs along with their scriptural library. Though all of these writings were discovered prior to 1975 and much of it prior to 1950, most of Christianity remains ignorant of what these discoveries have to teach us.