Tucson Temple

[cdowis]

1 hour ago, saemo said:

Baptism for the dead was done by someone, not necessarily early Christians.

And you know this.... how?  Because you say so?

The case for temple worship can only be applied to Jewish Christians.

We are not making a "case" for temple worship.  We are not theologians and philosophers arguing over the jots and tittles in the Bible.  We are following living prophets.

The First Council at Jerusalem decided that pagan converts to Christianity did not need to be circumcised, this indicates first that pagan converts did not first become Jews, and second that non-Jewish Christians were not worshipping in a Jewish temple. Of course, if temple worship were a requirement for a Christian, then the only alternative is that non-Jews were not actually practicing Christians. Which, has no historical support (either secular or religious history).

We do not circumcise anyone in the temple.

In addition, Jewish Christians were expelled from the synagogues very early in Christian history. The temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD, as Jesus prophesied. While prophesying so, he named HIMSELF as the temple. 

A Christianized form of synagogue worship did indeed live on, in Christian liturgy.

Would that liturgy include what Christ Himself taught?  Please tell us what the liturgy tells us about what Christ taught in the 40 days after His Resurrection.  (Acts 1:3)  What specifically did He teach, or did He simply repeat the Sermon on the Mount 10,000 times.

 

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, saemo said:

Baptism for the dead was done by someone, not necessarily early Christians.

The case for temple worship can only be applied to Jewish Christians. The First Council at Jerusalem decided that pagan converts to Christianity did not need to be circumcised, this indicates first that pagan converts did not first become Jews, and second that non-Jewish Christians were not worshipping in a Jewish temple. Of course, if temple worship were a requirement for a Christian, then the only alternative is that non-Jews were not actually practicing Christians. Which, has no historical support (either secular or religious history).

In addition, Jewish Christians were expelled from the synagogues very early in Christian history. The temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD, as Jesus prophesied. While prophesying so, he named HIMSELF as the temple. 

A Christianized form of synagogue worship did indeed live on, in Christian liturgy.

This first part of the argument is semantic in nature and begs the question.

If one did baptisms for the dead they are therefore not "Christian" so no Christians did baptisms for the dead. That is the argument.  Circular.  "Someone" did them, but doing them disqualifies them from being Christian so they were not "Christian" according to your definition.  Specifically they were held to be apostates.  So the true Christians were excommunicated by the apostate Christians.  As you know we call that the "Great Apostasy".

No one is asserting that "temple worship" was necessary for early Christians.  There were no early Christian temples- quite obviously.  What is being asserted is that CEREMONIES and rites now associated with temple worship were performed and known OUTSIDE of the Jewish temple structure.  Christians do not need Jewish "ordinances" and practices.

Just as endowments were first performed before there were temples in this dispensation, they were performed previously, on mountain peaks etc, or wherever they could be performed.

There is too much evidence that early Christian liturgy has inescapable parallels with present temple practice to argue otherwise- have you been reading the thread?

How did Joseph know all that Coptic Christian liturgy for example to copy it??  Or maybe the Copts are copying Mormons?  Ah THAT explains it!

[Robert F. Smith]

8 hours ago, saemo said:

Baptism for the dead was done by someone, not necessarily early Christians.

The case for temple worship can only be applied to Jewish Christians. The First Council at Jerusalem decided that pagan converts to Christianity did not need to be circumcised, this indicates first that pagan converts did not first become Jews, and second that non-Jewish Christians were not worshipping in a Jewish temple. Of course, if temple worship were a requirement for a Christian, then the only alternative is that non-Jews were not actually practicing Christians. Which, has no historical support (either secular or religious history).

In addition, Jewish Christians were expelled from the synagogues very early in Christian history. The temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD, as Jesus prophesied. While prophesying so, he named HIMSELF as the temple. 

A Christianized form of synagogue worship did indeed live on, in Christian liturgy.

You may have misunderstood my point, which is what you nearly state in your last sentence, where "temple" should have been placed where you have "synagogue.".  We need to go much further:  Christian cathedrals are surrogate temples, the priests regularly performing a sacrificial rite on the altar, and the congregants eating the body and drinking the blood of the one sacrificed -- just as the Jews did at Passover.  Indeed, even the minute details of Christian liturgy are taken from the Jewish temple (and festal pilgrimage) liturgy -- even though most Christians are completely unaware of the fact.  Why, because, as I said, the first Christians were all Jews, and they passed that liturgy on to all successor Christians.  After the death of Jesus, they regularly worshiped at the temple (Luke 24:53), as had Jesus himself throughout his ministry.  You can ask your priest about that, or read about it in the following books:

Barker, Margaret, The Great High Priest: The Temple Roots of Christian Liturgy (London: Clark, 2003).

Charlesworth, James H., ed., Jesus and the Temple: Textual and Archaeological Explorations (Fortress Press, 2014). 

Gavin, F., The Jewish Antecedents of the Christian Sacraments (London: SPCK, 1928/ reprint, N.Y.: Ktav, 1969).

Oesterley, William O. E., The Jewish Background to the Christian Liturgy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925/ reprint Gloucester, Mass.: P. Smith, 1965).

Werner, Eric, The Sacred Bridge: Liturgical Parallels in Synagogue and Early Church (N.Y.: Columbia Univ./London: D. Dobson, 1959/1963/Schocken, 1970/KTAV, 1984).

 

[snowflake]

On ‎3‎/‎21‎/‎2016 at 1:28 PM, JLHPROF said:

Let's see - early Christian examples of practices derived from or directly exemplifying our modern endowment?
Here we go:

John 19:23

• When the soldiers wanted to divide Jesus' coat or tunic, they saw it was not a patchwork of pieces sewn together. Rather, it had no seams, a quality garment that took some time to make. It was the same quality of clothing, woven from top to bottom in one piece, worn by the high priest in Jerusalem's temple. The first century Jewish historian Josephus stated in his book "Antiquities (History) of the Jews" that the temple's high priest had to wear a vestment colored blue. This clothing was not made by pieces of clothe sewn together, or even two large pieces. It was one long vestment that was parted along the breast and back.

http://www.templestudy.com/2008/04/17/early-byzantine-veil-with-gammadia/  (not to mention this non Christian derivation).
http://byustudies.byu.edu/content/early-christian-prayer-circle
1 Corinthians 15:29
John 13:8
John 12:7
Revelation 1:6
Revelation 2:17
Revelation 3:4

ALL temple items from early Christianity.  And that's just for starters - I could spend all day pulling together more.
Any of these alone wouldn't mean much, but you put them ALL together, recognize that Joseph Smith was unaware of most of them, and you get a pattern scattered through history including in the time of Christ.  Joseph would never have been able to put together such a jigsaw puzzle to form a coherent ordinance.  It would have been like putting a smashed egg back together.

Again as I look through the NT and the BOM (which contains the fullness of the everlasting gospel), no clear evidence that support the need for a temple. 

As in 1 Corinthians 15:20, Paul asks the rhetorical question as to "why are they then baptized for the dead?"   The entire chapter is dedicated to the Christian defense of the doctrine of resurrection. The Corinthians were denying that dead men rise again (Christ) and in doing so put their entire faith in jeopardy. If you read the chapter in context you should realize that Paul is not saying "baptize the dead" he is pointing out that some are erroneously doing so, he never endorses the practice.   The BOM never endorses the practice either. 

Your verses above are pulled completely out of context and In reading these verses one would be hard pressed to show that these weave together some sort of requirement of Christian temple.

[JLHPROF]

2 minutes ago, snowflake said:

Again as I look through the NT and the BOM (which contains the fullness of the everlasting gospel), no clear evidence that support the need for a temple.

As in 1 Corinthians 15:20, Paul asks the rhetorical question as to "why are they then baptized for the dead?"   The entire chapter is dedicated to the Christian defense of the doctrine of resurrection. The Corinthians were denying that dead men rise again (Christ) and in doing so put their entire faith in jeopardy. If you read the chapter in context you should realize that Paul is not saying "baptize the dead" he is pointing out that some are erroneously doing so, he never endorses the practice.   The BOM never endorses the practice either.

Your verses above are pulled completely out of context and In reading these verses one would be hard pressed to show that these weave together some sort of requirement of Christian temple.

And you just did exactly what I warned of - Any of these alone wouldn't mean much.

The fact that elements of the temple ceremonies are scattered all throughout history, religions, cultures, and the entire human experience, does more for me to show that Joseph could never have put together something so clear and amazing as the temple endowment.

These verses and quotes I provided are not meant to be proof texts, but are meant to be the trail of breadcrumbs.
You can choose to explain away one (as you attempt to do with baptism for the dead) but you cannot explain away the existence of temple symbols and patterns appearing in all of time in places that Joseph could never have known.  To me at least there is only one explanation.

[Garden Girl]

In his published 1999 FAIR paper "Early Christian and Jewish Rituals Related to Temple Practices," John Tvedtnes states "...let me note that I have, to date, found fifteen early Christian documents that speak of baptism for the dead, along with several Mandaean and Jewish texts.  This information will be included in my article "Baptism for the Dead in Early Christianity," scheduled for publication later this year in another FARMS temples volume."  

GG

Edited March 24, 2016 by Garden Girl

[Rain]

On Tuesday, March 22, 2016 at 0:41 PM, Robert F. Smith said:

You do need to do some homework:  Baptism for the dead was done by early Christians, and they worshiped regularly at the temple in Jerusalem after the death of Jesus.  You need to understand what actually took place in the Jewish temples, and how that set of ordinances and liturgy were adopted by the early Christians (who were Jews), and are still practiced today.  If you need sources, I can provide them.

The Restoration of all things entails all dispensations, not simply that of early Christianity.  No existing church on Earth is closer in practice and theology to the early Christian Church than the LDS Church.

I would appreciate the sources.  They sound like something interesting to read before or trip. 

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, Rain said:

I would appreciate the sources.  They sound like something interesting to read before or trip. 

Baptism for the dead was done by early Christians (I Cor 15:29, II Macc 12:44),

Temple rites for the dead was already a Jewish practice before the rise of Christianity, and Paul knew that -- see James Barr, Holy Scripture: Canon, Authority, Criticism (Phila.: Westminster Press, 1983), 40-43 n. 19.  For more see H.Nibley, "Baptism for the Dead in Ancient Times," online at http://publications.mi.byu.edu/transcript/baptism-for-the-dead-in-ancient-times/ .

and they worshiped regularly at the temple in Jerusalem after the death of Jesus (Luke 24:53).

You need to understand what actually took place in the Jewish temples, and how that set of ordinances and liturgy were adopted by the early Christians (who were Jews), and are still practiced today.  If you need sources, I can provide them.

Barker, Margaret, The Great High Priest: The Temple Roots of Christian Liturgy (London: Clark, 2003).

Charlesworth, James H., ed., Jesus and the Temple: Textual and Archaeological Explorations (Fortress Press, 2014). 

Gavin, F., The Jewish Antecedents of the Christian Sacraments (London: SPCK, 1928/ reprint, N.Y.: Ktav, 1969).

Oesterley, William O. E., The Jewish Background to the Christian Liturgy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925/ reprint Gloucester, Mass.: P. Smith, 1965).

Werner, Eric, The Sacred Bridge: Liturgical Parallels in Synagogue and Early Church (N.Y.: Columbia Univ./London: D. Dobson, 1959/1963/Schocken, 1970/KTAV, 1984).

The Restoration of all things entails all dispensations, not simply that of early Christianity.  No existing church on Earth is closer in practice and theology to the early Christian Church than the LDS Church.

Non-Mormon scholar Ernst Benz has said of the Mormon doctrine of apotheosis: 

Quote

"Regardless of how one feels about the doctrine of progressive deification, one thing is certain: Joseph Smith=s anthropology of man is closer to the concept of man in the primitive church than that of the proponents of the Augustinian doctrine of original sin, who considered the idea of such a fundamental and corporeal relationship between God and man as the quintessential heresy."  from ADer Mensch als Imago Dei,@ in Eranos Jahrbuch 40 (1971), and also published in Urbild und Abbild: Der Mensch und die mythische Welt: gesammelte Eranos-Beitrage (Leiden: Brill, 1974), 326 = English version in Benz, AImago Dei: Man in the Image of God,@ in T. Madsen, ed., Reflections on Mormonism (Provo, 1978), 201-219.

 

Edited March 24, 2016 by Robert F. Smith

[sunstoned]

On 3/16/2016 at 8:18 AM, halconero said:

I'm trying to place which other building it reminds me of. I want to say the Capitol Building, but I'm not sure that fits entirely.

Either way, it's a pretty rad design.

To me it looks a little mid-eastern with a little Indian influence.  I really like it.

Edited March 25, 2016 by sunstoned

[ChristKnight]

19 hours ago, Garden Girl said:

In his published 1999 FAIR paper "Early Christian and Jewish Rituals Related to Temple Practices," John Tvedtnes states "...let me note that I have, to date, found fifteen early Christian documents that speak of baptism for the dead, along with several Mandaean and Jewish texts.  This information will be included in my article "Baptism for the Dead in Early Christianity," scheduled for publication later this year in another FARMS temples volume."  

GG

Do you know if he published that article?

[Garden Girl]

5 hours ago, ChristKnight said:

Do you know if he published that article?

Yes he did... I downloaded it from the FAIR site several years ago... I'm not sure it's still on their website as I couldn't find it not long ago.  It's a terrific article (9 pages addressing his research/findings; 5 pages of notes/citations).  Perhaps someone has a current citation for you... it's one of my favorites as he addresses his findings on ancient temple practices related to:  Initiation, The Handclasp, Secret Words, Passing the Angels, Prayer Circle, Admitted Into God's Presence, and A Final Note (concluding with "just a brief word about temple teachings.")  

GG

[Calm]

I believe you can read it here:

http://publications.mi.byu.edu/book/the-temple-in-time-and-eternity/

[Daniel2]

On ‎03‎/‎16‎/‎2016 at 0:04 AM, Valentinus said:

I love the design of this temple. It's bad@$$. 

 

Very beautiful!  I love it when LDS temples are designed with the regional aesthetics in mind... I can appreciate the cost-savings aspect of many of the smaller temples, but I was saddened when they began to lose their individuality.  Good to see the return of some of the beauty of creativity coming back, with several of the newer temples.  Latter-day Saints are one of the few religious organizations still constructing gorgeous houses of worship which, I believe, will long be remembered when it comes to architecturally significant edifications in this century.

[cdowis]

Is it peer reviewed in a professional journal by nonLDS scholars within the past few weeks?  

[ChristKnight]

9 hours ago, Calm said:

I believe you can read it here:

http://publications.mi.byu.edu/book/the-temple-in-time-and-eternity/

Yep that's it, thanks.

[saemo]

On March 23, 2016 at 0:09 AM, Robert F. Smith said:

You may have misunderstood my point, which is what you nearly state in your last sentence, where "temple" should have been placed where you have "synagogue.".  We need to go much further:  Christian cathedrals are surrogate temples, the priests regularly performing a sacrificial rite on the altar, and the congregants eating the body and drinking the blood of the one sacrificed -- just as the Jews did at Passover.  Indeed, even the minute details of Christian liturgy are taken from the Jewish temple (and festal pilgrimage) liturgy -- even though most Christians are completely unaware of the fact.  Why, because, as I said, the first Christians were all Jews, and they passed that liturgy on to all successor Christians.  After the death of Jesus, they regularly worshiped at the temple (Luke 24:53), as had Jesus himself throughout his ministry.  You can ask your priest about that, or read about it in the following books:

Barker, Margaret, The Great High Priest: The Temple Roots of Christian Liturgy (London: Clark, 2003).

Charlesworth, James H., ed., Jesus and the Temple: Textual and Archaeological Explorations (Fortress Press, 2014). 

Gavin, F., The Jewish Antecedents of the Christian Sacraments (London: SPCK, 1928/ reprint, N.Y.: Ktav, 1969).

Oesterley, William O. E., The Jewish Background to the Christian Liturgy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925/ reprint Gloucester, Mass.: P. Smith, 1965).

Werner, Eric, The Sacred Bridge: Liturgical Parallels in Synagogue and Early Church (N.Y.: Columbia Univ./London: D. Dobson, 1959/1963/Schocken, 1970/KTAV, 1984).

 

I said synagogue on purpose, not accident.

You hint at the origins but have them somewhat mixed up. The liturgy practiced in the synagogues is what carried forward to what is now one of the liturgies in the Mass. The Mass, while one liturgy, is also three distinct liturgical rites. At one time they were three separate liturgies celebrated at three different times. 

The Liturgy of the Eucharist is the Passover meal (a home liturgy) carried forward into the Liturgy of the Eucharist. Of course, theologically, as explained in the book of Hebrews (the audience being Jewish Christians), the High Priest of the temple is fulfilled in Jesus Christ.  The sacrifice and prayers offered for the people is fulfilled in Jesus Christ. The one sacrifice of Jesus is re-presented at Mass. It is not a new sacrifice.

There is a short synopsis here. http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2010/06/christian-worship-in-the-first-century/

Our churches, all of them, are considered temples in the light of understanding that Jesus is the fulfillment of the temple. He is our temple, and further as His Body, we are the living stones of th temple. It is His presence in our churches that make them a temple, it is not the building that is the temple. The building without the presence of Jesus is just a building, maybe some with priceless art would make good museums  

 

As as an example, the presence of Jesus in every church is signified by a sanctuary lamp burning before the tabernacle, this practice comes directly from the synagogue.

[Robert F. Smith]

23 minutes ago, saemo said:

I said synagogue on purpose, not accident.

You hint at the origins but have them somewhat mixed up. The liturgy practiced in the synagogues is what carried forward to what is now one of the liturgies in the Mass. The Mass, while one liturgy, is also three distinct liturgical rites. At one time they were three separate liturgies celebrated at three different times. 

The Liturgy of the Eucharist is the Passover meal (a home liturgy) carried forward into the Liturgy of the Eucharist. Of course, theologically, as explained in the book of Hebrews (the audience being Jewish Christians), the High Priest of the temple is fulfilled in Jesus Christ.  The sacrifice and prayers offered for the people is fulfilled in Jesus Christ. The one sacrifice of Jesus is re-presented at Mass. It is not a new sacrifice.

There is a short synopsis here. http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2010/06/christian-worship-in-the-first-century/

Our churches, all of them, are considered temples in the light of understanding that Jesus is the fulfillment of the temple. He is our temple, and further as His Body, we are the living stones of th temple. It is His presence in our churches that make them a temple, it is not the building that is the temple. The building without the presence of Jesus is just a building, maybe some with priceless art would make good museums  

As as an example, the presence of Jesus in every church is signified by a sanctuary lamp burning before the tabernacle, this practice comes directly from the synagogue.[which in turn comes from the ner tamid "eternal light" burning in the temple]

Mostly true enough, but you left out a step -- that from the temple to synagogue, for that synagogue liturgy originates in the temple (and in the festal pilgrimage) liturgy, as I have already stated.  The Passover Seder meal is indeed done at home, or in a special area of assembly (like the Upper Room), but it is part of the festal pilgrimage liturgy, which focuses on the temple, where the Passover lamb is first sacrificed and roasted, and then sent home with the family for the Seder meal.  All Seders are done in memoriam of the first Seder eaten on the eve of the Exodus from Egypt, and all Sacraments of the Lord's Supper are done in memoriam of the Last Seder meal eaten by the Lord and his Apostles.

You understand a lot, saemo, but you fail to connect some of the dots.  Most Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christians don't understand the origins of their liturgy, and hardly any Protestants do.

[saemo]

8 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Mostly true enough, but you left out a step -- that from the temple to synagogue, for that synagogue liturgy originates in the temple (and in the festal pilgrimage) liturgy, as I have already stated.  The Passover Seder meal is indeed done at home, or in a special area of assembly (like the Upper Room), but it is part of the festal pilgrimage liturgy, which focuses on the temple, where the Passover lamb is first sacrificed and roasted, and then sent home with the family for the Seder meal.  All Seders are done in memoriam of the first Seder eaten on the eve of the Exodus from Egypt, and all Sacraments of the Lord's Supper are done in memoriam of the Last Seder meal eaten by the Lord and his Apostles.

You understand a lot, saemo, but you fail to connect some of the dots.  Most Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christians don't understand the origins of their liturgy, and hardly any Protestants do.

I don't smear things together just to get what I want, is the thing. The Liturgy of the Word is almost step by step the same as the liturgy in the synagogue. One of our people about to be baptized, tomorrow, is Jewish and he has commented on the striking similarities to synagogue worship, today. 

I see your point of course, but you fail to see that Jewish Christians, by 49AD were celebrating a liturgy based on the synagogue, the Seder meal, and the synaxis, not on the temple. They understood the significance of Christ, fulfilling the Old Covenant, including most importantly the temple sacrifice. In addition, Gentile converts could not enter the Jewish temple. If temple worship were considered central to Christian worship, the First Council at Jerusalem would have ruled that Gentiles must be circumcised and convert to Judaism. 

[ChristKnight]

Whenever thinking about the temple context of Catholicism, I enjoy reading Scott Hahn's praise for the book "The Church: Unlocking the Secrets to the Places Catholics Call Home" by Mike Aquilina.  He says, in part:

"What the Temple was to the Israelites, our churches are for us Catholics.  They are sanctuaries of God's presence-the meeting place of heaven and earth."  

I think it is clear that in Catholicism, churches, basilicas, cathedrals, etc are all in the synagogue and temple lineages.  In these buildings, Catholics purify themselves with water, are anointed with oil, a sacrificial priesthood ministers, psalms are sung, there is the Bread of the Presence (see Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist), feast and holy days are celebrated there, etc.  The sanctuary lamp calls to mind not only the synagogue, but also the temple, i.e. the menorah.  The Jewish synagogue and temple roots of Catholic liturgies are readily apparent and beautiful.  

[RevTestament]

On 3/16/2016 at 0:04 AM, Valentinus said:

I love the design of this temple. It's bad@$$. 

 

Yeah, I like it a lot.  Using a dome as a steeple is kinda new. Using the central windows to pick up the dome shape adds to it, and might be even better if one or two used dome shaped stained glass - although I'm sure that would be expensive.

I also like the Payson Temple a lot.

It incorporates a small dome feature which I rather like - I like this new emphasis away from the stark angularity in a lot of the temples. The Rome Temple addresses it in the lines of the building itself. 

Like Fort Collins Colorado too, although maybe not quite as much:

Edited March 26, 2016 by RevTestament

[Robert F. Smith]

12 hours ago, saemo said:

I don't smear things together just to get what I want, is the thing. The Liturgy of the Word is almost step by step the same as the liturgy in the synagogue. One of our people about to be baptized, tomorrow, is Jewish and he has commented on the striking similarities to synagogue worship, today. 

I see your point of course, but you fail to see that Jewish Christians, by 49AD were celebrating a liturgy based on the synagogue, the Seder meal, and the synaxis, not on the temple. They understood the significance of Christ, fulfilling the Old Covenant, including most importantly the temple sacrifice. In addition, Gentile converts could not enter the Jewish temple. If temple worship were considered central to Christian worship, the First Council at Jerusalem would have ruled that Gentiles must be circumcised and convert to Judaism. 

Well, you do see it through a glass darkly, saemo, and you are still missing that crucial step from  temple to synagogue.  No matter.  The early Jewish Christians understood the step only too well, and, being a trained rabbi, Paul could explain the reason why circumcision of heart was more important than the old sign (as Jeremiah 4:4 had already foreseen), which was no longer required of the Gentiles.  So too for Jewish kosher rules.  Yet some things remained very much the same:  Your Jewish friend is very insightful, and I can recall a Roman Catholic and a Lutheran friend who converted to Judaism having to undergo  immersion baptism (they call it a mikveh) as a key part of the process.  They did that at the Chief Rabbinate in Jerusalem.

Edited March 26, 2016 by Robert F. Smith

[saemo]

23 hours ago, ChristKnight said:

Whenever thinking about the temple context of Catholicism, I enjoy reading Scott Hahn's praise for the book "The Church: Unlocking the Secrets to the Places Catholics Call Home" by Mike Aquilina.  He says, in part:

"What the Temple was to the Israelites, our churches are for us Catholics.  They are sanctuaries of God's presence-the meeting place of heaven and earth."  

I think it is clear that in Catholicism, churches, basilicas, cathedrals, etc are all in the synagogue and temple lineages.  In these buildings, Catholics purify themselves with water, are anointed with oil, a sacrificial priesthood ministers, psalms are sung, there is the Bread of the Presence (see Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist), feast and holy days are celebrated there, etc.  The sanctuary lamp calls to mind not only the synagogue, but also the temple, i.e. the menorah.  The Jewish synagogue and temple roots of Catholic liturgies are readily apparent and beautiful.  

Which all must be viewed in the context of Salvation History, the continuity of faith in God's saving grace, which culminates in, with and through Jesus Christ. 

 

 

[Rain]

On 3/24/2016 at 3:59 PM, Robert F. Smith said:

Baptism for the dead was done by early Christians (I Cor 15:29, II Macc 12:44),

Temple rites for the dead was already a Jewish practice before the rise of Christianity, and Paul knew that -- see James Barr, Holy Scripture: Canon, Authority, Criticism (Phila.: Westminster Press, 1983), 40-43 n. 19.  For more see H.Nibley, "Baptism for the Dead in Ancient Times," online at http://publications.mi.byu.edu/transcript/baptism-for-the-dead-in-ancient-times/ .

and they worshiped regularly at the temple in Jerusalem after the death of Jesus (Luke 24:53).

You need to understand what actually took place in the Jewish temples, and how that set of ordinances and liturgy were adopted by the early Christians (who were Jews), and are still practiced today.  If you need sources, I can provide them.

Barker, Margaret, The Great High Priest: The Temple Roots of Christian Liturgy (London: Clark, 2003).

Charlesworth, James H., ed., Jesus and the Temple: Textual and Archaeological Explorations (Fortress Press, 2014). 

Gavin, F., The Jewish Antecedents of the Christian Sacraments (London: SPCK, 1928/ reprint, N.Y.: Ktav, 1969).

Oesterley, William O. E., The Jewish Background to the Christian Liturgy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925/ reprint Gloucester, Mass.: P. Smith, 1965).

Werner, Eric, The Sacred Bridge: Liturgical Parallels in Synagogue and Early Church (N.Y.: Columbia Univ./London: D. Dobson, 1959/1963/Schocken, 1970/KTAV, 1984).

The Restoration of all things entails all dispensations, not simply that of early Christianity.  No existing church on Earth is closer in practice and theology to the early Christian Church than the LDS Church.

Non-Mormon scholar Ernst Benz has said of the Mormon doctrine of apotheosis: 

 

Thank you. Putting some of this on my reading list now.

[mfbukowski]

On 3/26/2016 at 1:07 AM, saemo said:

I don't smear things together just to get what I want, is the thing. The Liturgy of the Word is almost step by step the same as the liturgy in the synagogue. One of our people about to be baptized, tomorrow, is Jewish and he has commented on the striking similarities to synagogue worship, today. 

I see your point of course, but you fail to see that Jewish Christians, by 49AD were celebrating a liturgy based on the synagogue, the Seder meal, and the synaxis, not on the temple. They understood the significance of Christ, fulfilling the Old Covenant, including most importantly the temple sacrifice. In addition, Gentile converts could not enter the Jewish temple. If temple worship were considered central to Christian worship, the First Council at Jerusalem would have ruled that Gentiles must be circumcised and convert to Judaism. 

And pray tell where did these synagogue liturgies begin?

Quote

 

Although synagogues existed a long time before the destruction of the 2nd Temple in 70 CE, communal worship in the time while the Temple still stood centered around the korbanot ("sacrificial offerings") brought by the kohanim ("priests") in the Holy Temple. The all-dayYom Kippur service, in fact, was an event in which the congregation both observed the movements of the kohen gadol ("the high priest") as he offered the day's sacrifices and prayed for his success.

During the Babylonian captivity (586–537 BCE) the Men of the Great Assembly formalized and standardized the language of the Jewish prayers. Prior to that people prayed as they saw fit, with each individual praying in his or her own way, and there were no standard prayers that were recited. Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai, one of the leaders at the end of the Second Temple era, promulgated the idea of creating individual houses of worship in whatever locale Jews found themselves. This contributed to the continuity of the Jewish people by maintaining a unique identity and a portable way of worship despite the destruction of the Temple, according to many historians.

Synagogues in the sense of purpose-built spaces for worship, or rooms originally constructed for some other purpose but reserved for formal, communal prayer, however, existed long before the destruction of the Second Temple.[2] The earliest archaeological evidence for the existence of very early synagogues comes from Egypt, where stone synagogue dedication inscriptions dating from the 3rd century BCE prove that synagogues existed by that date.[3] A synagogue dating from between 75 and 50 BCE has been uncovered at a Hasmonean-era winter palace near Jericho.[4][5] More than a dozen Second Temple era synagogues have been identified by archaeologists.[2]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synagogue

Edited March 27, 2016 by mfbukowski