Christianity And The Temple-Why Didn'T They Keep It Going?

[Duncan]

When Herod's Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. why didn't Christians then just build another one, why did they just let it die out? was it seen as something striclty Jewish that had no part to play in Christianity?

[Buzzard]

When Herod's Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. why didn't Christians then just build another one, why did they just let it die out? was it seen as something striclty Jewish that had no part to play in Christianity?

Well, if you believe the Masons, the temple rites were preserved and carried on by the Christians they encountered during the Crusades, when they brought the rites back with them. Of course, like all christianity, they had been altered by time and the essential meaning had been lost.

[thesometimesaint]

Massive persecution.

[Freedom]

I find it interesting that the temple ordinances became incorporated into the non-temple ordinances. Baptisms included washing and anointing with oil and included a number of other endowment features. So, rather than rebuilding the temple, the continued the ordinances outside the temple and gradually changed them until they became unrecognizable.

[Kevin Christensen]

See Margaret Barker's book Temple Themes in Christian Worship. Also Margaret's SBL talk on Hugh Nibley's "Christian Envy of the Temple."

Once you know what you are looking for, the ordinances become very recognizable. It's also clear than temple ideas influenced the architecture of many churches.

Several of her essays help understand what was going on. See, for instance, "The New Church" and the 2012 talk on Our Great High Priest: The Church as the New Temple.

http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/default.htm

Also, John Welch's observations about the loss of covenants is useful:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=42&chapid=204

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[rameumptom]

How do we know they didn't? It may be that temple ordinances were secretly performed in homes or churches. For instance, in Ephesus there is an ancient Christian house of worship that has two sections. The first section was used anciently for regular meetings, and included a baptismal font. The other section looked similar, but according to the Eastern Orthodox priests that care for it, was only for members. What then, was the font used for? baptisms for the dead, according to the priests.

There are various early Christian documents that are suggestive of the temple ordinances, such as the Gospel of Phillip, the Apocalypse of Paul, and even Hebrews.

It is possible that Jesus also performed such ordinances. The night at Gethsemane, when Christ was arrested, notes that a man was found wearing only a sheet (Book of Mark). The controversial Secret Book of Mark may also suggest temple ordinances, as it mentions Jesus privately teaching a young man at night secrets of the gospel, a part of which was obviously done in the nude.

The proto-orthodox Church eventually rejected much of the esoterica in the religion, as it did with continuing revelation, and standardized on just a small group of ordinances, such as baptism.

[Ron Beron]

When Herod's Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. why didn't Christians then just build another one, why did they just let it die out? was it seen as something striclty Jewish that had no part to play in Christianity?

The quick answer is the same as to why they didn't build churches, i.e., they felt they lived in the latter days and that the building of a temple was unnecessary. When things calmed down a bit there was some indication that a church built in the same dimensions as the temple was built in Jerusalem by Justinian to house the menorah.

EDIT...Another reason is the simple animosity that grew from the gentile Christians towards the Jewish Christians. James, the brother of Jesus, continued to officiate within the temple grounds until his murder. With Paul's teachings there grew an overwhelming movement to negate temple ceremonies with the assumption of Jesus as the living embodiment of the temple. Elements of the temple ceremony were saved only to be saved as evolution within a new gentile Christianity.

Edited May 18, 2012 by Ron Beron

[saemo]

When Herod's Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. why didn't Christians then just build another one, why did they just let it die out? was it seen as something striclty Jewish that had no part to play in Christianity?

The evangelization of the gentiles began in 46AD. They would have never been in a Jewish temple, as they were never Jewish and never became Jewish. As you will recall, the question of whether a gentile convert had to be circumcised was resolved as baptism being the replacement of circumcision. It wasn't possible for a non-circumcized male to enter the temple in Jerusalem.

The Jewish temple had a primary purpose of sacrifice, which is fulfilled in Jesus Christ "the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world".

Christian Jews were expelled from the temple in Jerusalem.

The worship that carried forward in Christian communities is based on the Jewish liturgies that were found in the synagogues. Communal worship that is described very well in early Christian writings.

Edited May 17, 2012 by saemo

[Freedom]

It is remarkable how quickly we abandon long held traditions. In the few short years of world war 2, the church in Germany became quite bastardized with all sorts of changes. The church in Africa and Eastern Europe is under constant guidance to avoid apostasy. I suspect that the destruction of the temple was devastating, but after a few years of living without it, the people adapted and forgot about needing to replace it. Without divine instruction to do so, they just moved on to other matters they considered important.

[Avatar4321]

1) Lack of Revelation

2) Lack of Priesthood

3) The fact that the Saints were scattered.

Just my own opinions here.

[Storm Rider]

Massive persecution.

Massive persecutions did not occur until much later.

[Cobalt-70]

When Herod's Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. why didn't Christians then just build another one, why did they just let it die out? was it seen as something striclty Jewish that had no part to play in Christianity?

For three reasons: (1) Christians did not perform temple ceremonies. They did baptism, but not in temples. There was an "Endowment" on the day of Pentecost, but that was not in the temple. Christians married, but like Jews they did not get married in temples. (2) By 70 AD, Christianity had become a largely non-Jewish religion, and the Gentile Christians had no reason to rebuild the temple. (3) The Jews didn't rebuild the temple, so how possibly could the Christians have rebuilt it, given that there were far more Jews than Christians at the time.

[Log]

Christians did not perform temple ceremonies. They did baptism, but not in temples. There was an "Endowment" on the day of Pentecost, but that was not in the temple. Christians married, but like Jews they did not get married in temples.

In other words: the Early Christians did perform temple ordinances, but they did so outside of the temple.

[Freedom]

In other words: the Early Christians did perform temple ordinances, but they did so outside of the temple.

Gradually, baptisms looked more and more like our current temple ceremonies, and then they started to drop off or get changed.

[BCSpace]

Hebrews 10:19-20 tells us that the temple is still necessary in Christianity because it equates the veil with the flesh of Christ. Sure the veil of the temple was rent at Christ's death and that is the common reason nonLDS Christians give to say the temple is no longer necessary. But since Christ was resurrected, symbolically the veil is repaired, and so likewise the esoteric rites, like the Priesthood, are changed which change is what Hebrews is all about.

19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,

20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;

Hebrews 10

Edited May 18, 2012 by BCSpace

[Damien the Leper]

I'll refer to Rob Bell's Resurrection video.

_______________________________________

Jesus is standing in front of the temple in Jerusalem

the massive gleaming brick and stone and gold house of God

and he says destroy this temple

and I’ll rebuild it in three days

the people listening to him said how are you going to do that?

it took 46 years to build this temple!

but he wasn’t talking about that temple

he’s talking about himself

he essentially says, listen

I’m going to be killed

that’s where this is headed

because you don’t confront corrupt systems of power

without paying for it

sometimes with your own blood

and so he’s headed to his execution

if you had witnessed this divine life extinguished on a cross

how would you not be overwhelmed with despair?

is the world ultimately a cold, hard, dead place?

does death have the last word?

is it truly, honestly, actually dark

and so whatever light we do see

whatever good we do stumble upon

are those just blips on the radar?

momentary interruptions in an otherwise meaningless existence?

because if that’s the case then despair is the

only reasonable response

it’s easy to be cynical

but Jesus says destroy this temple and I’ll rebuild it

he insists that his execution would not be the end

he’s talking about something new and unexpected

happening after his death

he’s talking about resurrection

resurrection announces that God has not given up on the world

because this world matters

this world that we call home

dirt and blood and sweat and skin and light and water

this world that God is redeeming and restoring and renewing

greed and violence and abuse they are not right

and they cannot last

they belong to death and death does not belong

resurrection says that what we do with our lives matters

in this body

the one that we inhabit right now

every act of compassion matters

every work of art that celebrates the good and the true matters

every fair and honest act of business and trade

every kind word

they all belong and they will all go on in God’s good world

nothing will be forgotten

nothing will be wasted

it all has it’s place

everybody believes something

everybody believes somebody

Jesus invites us to trust resurrection

that every glimmer of good

every hint of hope

every impulse that elevates the soul

is a sign, a taste, a glimpse

of how things actually are

and how things will ultimately be

resurrection affirms this life and the next

as a seamless reality

embraced

graced

and saved by God

there is an unexpected mysterious presence

who meets each of us in our lowest moments

when we have no strength when we have nothing left

and we can’t go on we hear the voice that speaks those

words

destroy this temple and I’ll rebuild it

do you believe this?

that’s the question Jesus asked then

and that’s the question he asks now

Jesus’ friends arrive at his tomb and they’re told

he isn’t here

you didn’t see that coming, did you?

he’s isn’t here

there is nothing to fear

and nothing can ever be the same again

we are living in a world in the midst of rescue

with endless unexpected possibilities

they will take my life and I will die Jesus says

but that will not be the end

and when you find yourself assuming that it’s over

when it’s lost, gone, broken and it could never be

put back together again,

when it’s been destroyed and you swear that it could never

be rebuilt

hold on a minute

because in that moment

things will in fact have just begun

_________________________________________

Bold emphasis added.

Essentially, Jesus is saying that it's not about the temple and its relevance to the current religious community. Jesus is saying "I'm your temple! I'm about to die for you." He is the 'temple' that will be rebuilt in three days. Let me reiterate...JESUS IS THE TEMPLE! Because of Resurrection, He is all that matters and not a check list of ordinances or buildings. I'm not arguing against temples, I'm saying that they are of less significance in the grander scheme of things.

Edited May 18, 2012 by Valentinus

[BCSpace]

but he wasn’t talking about that temple

he’s talking about himself

Sure. But the temple itself wasn't destroyed as implied in the imagery you present:

the massive gleaming brick and stone and gold house of God

and he says destroy this temple

and I’ll rebuild it in three days

The veil was rent though and the scriptures link the veil with the flesh of Christ. The video (as you quoted) itself admits that Christ was talking about his own body which only strengthens the Hebrews 10 link to the necessity of the temple and the change in the rites.

[Damien the Leper]

Sure. But the temple itself wasn't destroyed as implied in the imagery you present:

The veil was rent though and the scriptures link the veil with the flesh of Christ. The video (as you quoted) itself admits that Christ was talking about his own body which only strengthens the Hebrews 10 link to the necessity of the temple and the change in the rites.

Incorrect. Jesus is SAYING that HE is the TEMPLE. The Holy House of Worship. I'm not entirely sure what Priscilla(?) was getting at in Hebrews.

Jesus said "Destroy the temple and He will rebuild it in three days". He was talking about Himself...as the video stated. The temple doesn't matter when HE is the REAL temple.

[Freedom]

He is, arguably, the real temple, but he is also the word. Does that mean that we no longer need the bible? Your logic is flawed. it is clear that the christians continued to worship in the temple. If it was no longer necessary, then this practice would have stopped. He is our ultimate source, but as the New Testament teaches, we access him through obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. Else why is there baptism for the dead, after all, of the dead rise not at all?

[Damien the Leper]

He is, arguably, the real temple, but he is also the word. Does that mean that we no longer need the bible? Your logic is flawed. it is clear that the christians continued to worship in the temple. If it was no longer necessary, then this practice would have stopped. He is our ultimate source, but as the New Testament teaches, we access him through obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. Else why is there baptism for the dead, after all, of the dead rise not at all?

Come on! I'm focusing on JESUS' words and not necessarily the words of His followers. John's description of Jesus hold's no candle to Jesus essentially describing Himself as the temple. Your logic is flawed.

Your citing Paul's letter to the Corinthians concerning proxy baptism isn't founded within the scriptural context. In studying the Textus Receptus and the cultural format there is no strong evidence to support this claim.

[Robert F. Smith]

When Herod's Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. why didn't Christians then just build another one, why did they just let it die out? was it seen as something striclty Jewish that had no part to play in Christianity?

The Christians were scattered and in disarray, James the Just having been executed by the HP and Sanhedrin. They couldn't afford to rebuild anything. However, in the diaspora, both Jews and Christians eventually adopted architecture and adapted liturgy characteristic of the Temple, something which is still evident in Jewish synagogues (and "temples") and in Roman Catholic, Anglican, and Eastern Orthodox cathedrals. Indeed, the daily mass said by priests in those Christian edifices is meant to be a substitute for the lack of the regular blood sacrifices once offered in Jewish temples.

[saemo]

Hebrews 10:19-20 tells us that the temple is still necessary in Christianity because it equates the veil with the flesh of Christ. Sure the veil of the temple was rent at Christ's death and that is the common reason nonLDS Christians give to say the temple is no longer necessary. But since Christ was resurrected, symbolically the veil is repaired, and so likewise the esoteric rites, like the Priesthood, are changed which change is what Hebrews is all about.

19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,

20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;

Hebrews 10

There you brought out the difference. For Christians, Jesus Christ is our temple. He refers to Himself in this way, when He says the temple will be torn down, and in three days raised up again.

The purpose of the Jewish temples was to perform sacrifices that were meant for the cleansing of sin. The temple sacrifice is fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

[altersteve]

There you brought out the difference. For Christians, Jesus Christ is our temple. He refers to Himself in this way, when He says the temple will be torn down, and in three days raised up again.

Jesus does not use the word "temple" to refer to Himself, He only uses it to describe His body. There is a difference, since only His body was torn down; His spirit never died (and neither do our spirits). His physical body is the tabernacle of God which houses His spirit body, just as our physical bodies (which, by the way, like Jesus' body, are also referred to as temples; see 1 Corinthians 6:19) do the same for our spirits. See also D&C 93:33-35.

Also, the Jews in the time of Jesus were misusing the temple. It was time for it to be "torn down" and replaced with His body, which we symbolically partake of with His "bloody of the new testament" (the sacrament) in order to renew our covenants. But this does NOT mean the temple is to no longer be used, and this is pretty obvious when we take note of how frequently the Book of Acts tells us how Paul and other Apostles continued to use the temple even after Jesus' ascension.

In essence, Jesus' description of His body as a "temple" is a lot deeper than what you're saying.

The purpose of the Jewish temples was to perform sacrifices that were meant for the cleansing of sin. The temple sacrifice is fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

The purpose of the Jewish temples, actually, was not just to perform sacrifices. That was indeed a major purpose, but there were a lot of things that went on in there.

[blueadept]

Also, the Jews in the time of Jesus were misusing the temple. It was time for it to be "torn down" and replaced with His body, which we symbolically partake of with His "bloody of the new testament" (the sacrament) in order to renew our covenants. But this does NOT mean the temple is to no longer be used, and this is pretty obvious when we take note of how frequently the Book of Acts tells us how Paul and other Apostles continued to use the temple even after Jesus' ascension.

In order to help the non-LDS who are following this thread, perhaps it would be helpful to show some scripture where the non-Jewish converted Christians could participate in the Jewish Temple such as St Paul himself since he wasn't Jewish but most of the other apostles were of a Jewish background.

IMO, this is why LDS have always stressed the importance of Temples while it's a non-issue for the non-LDS folks.

[altersteve]

In order to help the non-LDS who are following this thread, perhaps it would be helpful to show some scripture where the non-Jewish converted Christians could participate in the Jewish Temple such as St Paul himself since he wasn't Jewish but most of the other apostles were of a Jewish background.

IMO, this is why LDS have always stressed the importance of Temples while it's a non-issue for the non-LDS folks.

Acts 21:26-30, 24:6-18, and 26:21 describe Paul worshiping and praying in the temple. He also saw a vision of Christ in the temple, as recorded in Acts 22:17-21.