Best Online Sources for Ancient Temple Practices?

[mfbukowski]

Quote

 

⁷ Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.

⁸ Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

⁹ And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

 

Ephesians 3

 

That's a start.  I have a ton of others.

But if you don't see them, you don't see them.  Debating it is irrelevant.

Edited January 23, 2016 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Sanpitch said:

Because JWs know more about the bible than LDS do.  And this JW lady has been active LDS and knows the rituals but not in the temple.

So she doesn't know anything about the temple, but she is an expert in the rituals

Uh huh.

Do you have any clue how ridiculous that is? 

[filovirus]

1 hour ago, BookofMormonLuvr said:

What exactly would I be lacking? I would have faith in God, Jesus, keep Their commandments and acknowledge Their ordinances. Is not personally accepting everything the men leading the church teach lack of faith or obedience? If I decide to REST on Sabbath and worship on Sunday and keep the Appointed Times instead of pagan inspired Christian holidays is that somehow unacceptable? I fail to see how what you are saying applies to my circumstance.

Just an internal rhetorical question to make sure you would be doing it for the right reasons, if it is a path you should ever decide to follow. Ultimately it is between you and the Lord; the true meaning of the covenants associated with the temple ordinances.

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, BookofMormonLuvr said:

I have skimmed the first little bit, and come across an interesting phenomenon that I encountered in another LDS work:

It seems LDS scholars have a distinctly different opinion of King Josiah than what the Bible offers up. That  instead of getting rid of the false traditions in their worship, his actions actually stopped true and correct worship in Judah. 

Margaret Barker is a Methodist.

Edited January 23, 2016 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

OOPS

I am half asleep- I saw that link to a work by "Baker" and instead I read "Barker"

You must read Margaret Barker's stuff- totally incredible

She is not LDS and remains a Methodist, and yet is probably THE best authority on ancient temple practices.

This is her website  http://www.margaretbarker.com/Essentially she vindicates the LDS temple position and does so on the basis of pure scholarship, though not a member of the church

Quote

 

Margaret Barker has developed an approach to Biblical Studies now known as Temple Theology. Margaret Barker read theology at the University of Cambridge, England, and went on to pursue her research independently. She was elected President of the Society for Old Testament Study in 1998, and edited the Society’s second Monograph Series, published by Ashgate. She has so far written 17 books, which form a sequence, later volumes building on her earlier conclusions. Since 1997, she has been part of the symposium Religion, Science and the Environment, convened by His All Holiness Bartholomew I, the Ecumenical Patriarch. This work has led her to develop the practical implications of temple theology as the basis for a Christian environment theology. In July 2008 Margaret Barker was awarded a DD by the Archbishop of Canterbury ‘in recognition of her work on the Jerusalem Temple and the origins of Christian Liturgy, which has made a significantly new contribution to our understanding of the New Testament and opened up important fields for research.’

 

Edited January 23, 2016 by mfbukowski

[rchorse]

It's not an online resource, but I really like Hugh Nibley's Temple and Cosmos. It talks a lot about ancient temple rituals and their connection to the modern, LDS temple.

[Calm]

http://publications.mi.byu.edu/book/temple-and-cosmos/

[readstoomuch]

Temple and Cosmos.  Yes!

the Message of the Joseph smith Papyrus: an ancient egyptian ensowment!  Especially appendices.  If you search this title there was a thread also along the lines you are asking about. 

There is a lot written on this.  Don't despair.

[Sanpitch]

11 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

So she doesn't know anything about the temple, but she is an expert in the rituals

Uh huh.

Do you have any clue how ridiculous that is? 

Yes, to you.  But then you don't know all the details of what she knows.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

8 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

OOPS

I am half asleep- I saw that link to a work by "Baker" and instead I read "Barker"

You must read Margaret Barker's stuff- totally incredible

She is not LDS and remains a Methodist, and yet is probably THE best authority on ancient temple practices.

This is her website  http://www.margaretbarker.com/Essentially she vindicates the LDS temple position and does so on the basis of pure scholarship, though not a member of the church

Random Query:

Has she ever explained why she remains as Methodist if LDS practices are so stunningly similar to pre-Babylonian Jewish religious practices?

[volgadon]

13 hours ago, BookofMormonLuvr said:

Alrighty. Thanks for your HO.

 

Well, it is basically contemporary fringe Protestantism looking at the Hebrew Bible and simultaneously managing to adapt garbled understandings of later Jewish praxis and belief while rejecting the same in what is a latent though mild form of antisemitism. Calling Jesus Yeshua doesn't really provide deeper insight. If you want to understand connections between LDS and and ancient temples, you'll be better off first studying academic works on the biblical temple, like Othmar Keel's book on temple imagery in the psalms.

[volgadon]

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1575060140/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1453568965&sr=1-1&pi=SL75_QL70&keywords=Othmar+Keel

[BookofMormonLuvr]

2 minutes ago, volgadon said:

Well, it is basically contemporary fringe Protestantism looking at the Hebrew Bible and simultaneously managing to adapt garbled understandings of later Jewish praxis and belief while rejecting the same in what is a latent though mild form of antisemitism. Calling Jesus Yeshua doesn't really provide deeper insight. If you want to understand connections between LDS and and ancient temples, you'll be better off first studying academic works on the biblical temple, like Othmar Keel's book on temple imagery in the psalms.

I am glad you were able to lump us all into one convenient box. Bravo.

Thanks for the lead on the Keel book, at least.

[volgadon]

16 minutes ago, BookofMormonLuvr said:

I am glad you were able to lump us all into one convenient box. Bravo.

Thanks for the lead on the Keel book, at least.

Well, considering some of your comments here in the past on Judaism and such, the shoe fits.

[Spammer]

 

2 hours ago, BookofMormonLuvr said:

Random Query:

Has she ever explained why she remains as Methodist if LDS practices are so stunningly similar to pre-Babylonian Jewish religious practices?

There are obvious terminological parallels, but the practices aren't all that similar.  What Her work does accomplish - as she clearly states again and again throughout her work - is to provide overwhelming evidence for a direct causal link between the ancient Hebrew temple and the liturgies of the ancient Catholic tradition (Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, etc.).  Using Barker to vindicate LDS practices is feasible only if her primary focus on the Catholic tradition is downplayed.  The better question is why she remains a Methodist when her body of work establishes that it's Catholic practices that are stunningly similar to the ancient temple.  Barker notes in her essay 'Now I See' how amazed she was to discover that she was standing in the ancient Hebrew temple when she was invited and attended her first Orthodox Divine Liturgy.  Unlike her work on the Catholic tradition and for obvious reasons, she's never published a point by point comparison between LDS temple practices and the ancient temple. It would be interesting to see if she would feel the same if she were to attend an Endowment session.  She would need to become LDS first, however, so unlike her clear statements linking the ancient temple and the Catholic liturgical tradition, what she might think about how closely LDS practices mirror the ancient temple is speculative. 

Edited January 23, 2016 by Spammer

[BookofMormonLuvr]

14 minutes ago, Spammer said:

 

There are obvious terminological parallels, but the practices aren't all that similar.  What Her work does accomplish - as she clearly states again and again in her work - is provide overwhelming evidence for a direct causal link between the ancient Hebrew temple and the ancient liturgies of the Catholic tradition (Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, etc.).  Using Barker to vindicate LDS practices is feasible only if her primary focus on the Catholic tradition is downplayed.  The better question is why she remains a Methodist when her body of work establishes that it's Catholic practices that are stunningly similar to the ancient temple.  Barker notes in her essay 'Now I See' how amazed she was to discover that she was standing in the ancient temple when she was invited and attended an Orthodox Divine Liturgy.  It would be interesting to see if she would feel the same if she were to attend an Endowment session.  She would need to become LDS first, however.

Thank you for your insight.

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, BookofMormonLuvr said:

Has she ever explained why she remains as Methodist if LDS practices are so stunningly similar to pre-Babylonian Jewish religious practices?

I still don't understand why you would expect them to be.
Jewish religious practices would not be the same as LDS practices, nor should they be.
LDS practices should have more in common with the events Moses recorded in Genesis than any Mosaic law ordinances.  Genesis pretty much contains the entire temple endowment, from the creation, to Adam's garment and altar, down to Abraham, and Jacob wrestling with God.  All temple symbols.

Expecting Mormon temples to look like the Israelite tabernacle or Solomon's temple is a false comparison.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

22 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I still don't understand why you would expect them to be.
Jewish religious practices would not be the same as LDS practices, nor should they be.
LDS practices should have more in common with the events Moses recorded in Genesis than any Mosaic law ordinances.  Genesis pretty much contains the entire temple endowment, from the creation, to Adam's garment and altar, down to Abraham, and Jacob wrestling with God.  All temple symbols.

Expecting Mormon temples to look like the Israelite tabernacle or Solomon's temple is a false comparison.

Because we are told they are the Restoration of ancient Temple Rites- and the mention of temples among the Jews and Nephites is claimed as proof that the LDS Temples ordinances are correct (at least by some Mormons (maybe they don't understand themselves?))

[JLHPROF]

2 minutes ago, BookofMormonLuvr said:

Because we are told they are the Restoration of ancient Temple Rites- and the mention of temples among the Jews and Nephites is claimed as proof that the LDS Temples ordinances are correct (at least by some Mormons (maybe they don't understand themselves?))

Ancient (as in Adam, Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Enoch, and Moses prior to the law of Moses).  Not Jewish.

Jewish temple rituals were instituted 2000 years after Adam.  For 2000 years prior the temple rites were practiced much as they are today (with a few changes).
Jewish temple rituals operate under the Law of Moses, a law that ended in Christ.  The principles of the Jewish temple rituals are still found in modern LDS temples, but the temples of today have no requirement to match them.

And in my opinion, a lot of Mormons don't understand the temple endowment.  Some do.  Some understand it very very well.
But until the endowment is viewed as being instituted before the foundations of the earth and being truly ancient in design and pattern, understanding remains limited. 

 

[BookofMormonLuvr]

17 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Ancient (as in Adam, Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Enoch, and Moses prior to the law of Moses).  Not Jewish.

Jewish temple rituals were instituted 2000 years after Adam.  For 2000 years prior the temple rites were practiced much as they are today (with a few changes).
Jewish temple rituals operate under the Law of Moses, a law that ended in Christ.  The principles of the Jewish temple rituals are still found in modern LDS temples, but the temples of today have no requirement to match them.

And in my opinion, a lot of Mormons don't understand the temple endowment.  Some do.  Some understand it very very well.
But until the endowment is viewed as being instituted before the foundations of the earth and being truly ancient in design and pattern, understanding remains limited. 

 

And that is the verifiable link I am looking for.

So far I have been given a few recommendations concerning books advocating for the BofAbraham as evidence, a link to an essay trying to link a theatrical presentation done publicaly during Tabernacles to the Endowment, and a succession of scriptural references that people believe shows proof of the same ordinance anciently because of a word here and there.

Where is the solid historical evidence of signs and tokens, temple garments, etc... among the pre-Exodus people- and where did they do these rites? I find no mention of temples prior to Moses (that I can remember). Even Nibley, if I am remembering correctly, has to point to Egyptian  and other heathen ceremonies to make the case for the current Temple Endowment.

And why were certain signs and tokens been changed in the 20th century, if the ceremony is eternal?

People can hop up and down, get red in the face, accuse me of not being sincere or of being anti-, but I am searching and seeking in sincerity.

I am tempted to throw the whole Restoration out, and just worship at home with my Bible and Book of Mormon. Seems there is vomit on all the tables. I am frustrated, not looking to pick a fight or prove someone wrong.

Edited January 23, 2016 by BookofMormonLuvr

[JLHPROF]

4 minutes ago, BookofMormonLuvr said:

So far I have been given a few recommendations concerning books advocating for the BofAbraham as evidence, a link to an essay trying to link a theatrical presentation done publicaly during Tabernacles to the Endowment, and a succession of scriptural references that people believe shows proof of the same ordinance anciently because of a word here and there.

Where is the solid historical evidence of signs and tokens, temple garments, etc... among the pre-Exodus people- and where did they do these rites? I find no mention of temples prior to Moses (that I can remember). Even Nibley, if I am remembering correctly, has to point to Egyptian  and other heathen ceremonies to make the case for the current Temple Endowment.

Well, given that some members even on this board doubt that Adam, Abraham, Noah, Moses etc were real people, I think finding proof positive of their ordinances will prove challenging to you.  Unlike Jewish traditions which have records both oral and written.  I don't know what solid historical evidence from the life of Noah or Abraham you expect to find outside the scriptures.

The evidences of signs, tokens, garments, temple prayer, sacred embraces, and creation accounts are all scattered throughout scripture and as Nibley points out pop up in other cultures of the time that Joseph Smith would have known nothing about.
The Book of Genesis IS a temple endowment record.  That's exactly what it is.  Moses wasn't playing historian there, he was recounting his temple endowment.

Quote

And why were certain signs and tokens been changed in the 20th century, if the ceremony is eternal?

Good question.  They shouldn't have been.  The modern claim is that was the presentation, the theatrical, the symbolism that is not eternal in nature.  I don't agree, but others do.
But even I acknowledge that while the endowment ceremony may be eternal in nature, the method of presentation and theatrical script are not.

Quote

People can hop up and down, get red in the face, accuse me of not being sincere or of being anti-, but I am searching and seeking in sincerity.
I am tempted to throw the whole Restoration out, and just worship at home with my Bible and Book of Mormon. Seems there is vomit on all the tables. I am frustrated, not looking to pick a fight or prove someone wrong.

I am not accusing you of anything.  I just think you are looking for something unnecessary.  The endowment is in the historical record of the scriptures.  Elements pop up in many ancient cultures (Egyptians, Babylonians, Jews, etc). The endowment is the great mystery of God, sometimes given in completeness to man, and when it is not on the earth the elements are scattered to the four winds of cultures and histories.  But they are always to be found.

[mapman]

I don't think that you're going to find anything exactly like the temple endowment in ancient sources. The main reason I say that is because parts of it clearly are talking about the apostasy and restoration, and so weren't ever intended to be a copy of an ancient ritual. I mean, an older version of the endowment even had a Protestant preacher as one of the characters. We tend to think of "restoration" as meaning bringing back exactly everything that existed in the early Christian church in exactly the same way, but that's not really what Joseph Smith was thinking. Joseph Smith saw the restoration as being a restoring the Gospel and priesthood power, and then bringing together into one great whole everything true and good from the past, present, and latter-day revelation. Terryl Givens has a really good explanation of this that can be found here. Most of what Joseph Smith received revelation on was based off of questions he had from reading the Bible. The endowment is no exception. I don't know whether anyone else has written about it, but in my opinion it is primarily based off of Hebrews 8-9, which describes a Christian version of the Israelite Day of Atonement ritual under the new covenant and the great high priest of the Melchizedek priesthood, Jesus Christ. I think that the basic structure of the endowment comes from these scriptures, and then the rest of the elements are a mixture of various Bible scriptures and Freemason symbols. I don't think that the endowment necessarily was even intended to look like any ancient ritual, but it is undeniably based off of truths in the Bible.

[mapman]

This is another scripture that the endowment was clearly modeled on:

"And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah: And I will clothe him with thy robe, and strengthen him with thy girdle, and I will commit thy government into his hand: and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. And I will fasten him as a nail in a sure place; and he shall be for a glorious throne to his father’s house. And they shall hang upon him all the glory of his father’s house, the offspring and the issue, all vessels of small quantity, from the vessels of cups, even to all the vessels of flagons. In that day, saith the Lord of hosts, shall the nail that is fastened in the sure place be removed, and be cut down, and fall; and the burden that was upon it shall be cut off: for the Lord hath spoken it." (Isaiah 22:20-25)

I don't really know what the verse is actually talking about, but these verses were definitely one of the inspirations for the endowment

[JLHPROF]

3 minutes ago, mapman said:

I don't think that you're going to find anything exactly like the temple endowment in ancient sources. The main reason I say that is because parts of it clearly are talking about the apostasy and restoration, and so weren't ever intended to be a copy of an ancient ritual. I mean, an older version of the endowment even had a Protestant preacher as one of the characters. We tend to think of "restoration" as meaning bringing back exactly everything that existed in the early Christian church in exactly the same way, but that's not really what Joseph Smith was thinking. Joseph Smith saw the restoration as being a restoring the Gospel and priesthood power, and then bringing together into one great whole everything true and good from the past, present, and latter-day revelation. Terryl Givens has a really good explanation of this that can be found here. Most of what Joseph Smith received revelation on was based off of questions he had from reading the Bible. The endowment is no exception. I don't know whether anyone else has written about it, but in my opinion it is primarily based off of Hebrews 8-9, which describes a Christian version of the Israelite Day of Atonement ritual under the new covenant and the great high priest of the Melchizedek priesthood, Jesus Christ. I think that the basic structure of the endowment comes from these scriptures, and then the rest of the elements are a mixture of various Bible scriptures and Freemason symbols. I don't think that the endowment necessarily was even intended to look like any ancient ritual, but it is undeniably based off of truths in the Bible.

I don't agree with a lot of this, but you do raise a very interesting point:

•  parts of it clearly are talking about the apostasy and restoration, and so weren't ever intended to be a copy of an ancient ritual. I mean, an older version of the endowment even had a Protestant preacher as one of the characters.

This is an example of something I do consider as having changed since the endowment was given to man.  Obviously someone receiving their endowment in the days of Christ wouldn't have featured this part.  They even used to sing a protestant hymn. 
However, since I am a firm defender of the endowment as eternal in nature, I think rather than the apostasy of the Christian Church, the endowment in Christ's day might have featured a drama using corrupted Jewish traditions as Lucifer's tools instead of Protestantism.  Perhaps in the days of Abraham or Moses the corrupted version of the true gospel was represented by the Egyptian religion.

See, to me the unalterable, eternal part of this portion of the endowment is that Satan corrupts the religions of men to his purposes and how we can recognize the true gospel.  So the portrayal may change, but should never be eliminated or that teaching is lost.

[Robert F. Smith]

12 hours ago, rchorse said:

It's not an online resource, but I really like Hugh Nibley's Temple and Cosmos. It talks a lot about ancient temple rituals and their connection to the modern, LDS temple.

You are mistaken, the book is online at http://publications.mi.byu.edu/book/temple-and-cosmos/ .