Music is a fundamental part of worship, and was even more so anciently than it is today.  Before the printed word made the sacred word so accessible to the masses, it was passed on from generation to generation orally.  But this was not just the spoken word.  In order for the word to be remembered and said the same way over and over again, over decades and centuries, a mnemonic device was employed to facilitate the reciter.  This device was music.  The sacred word, every word, was put to music.

This can be seen in the way the Bible is written in Hebrew, one of the oldest languages in the world.  In Hebrew, particularly the Hebrew Bible, there are cantillation marks that specify how the text should be sung: 

Hebrew text, vowel points in red, cantillation in blue

Cantillation marks are described by Wikipedia:

Cantillation is the ritual chanting of readings from the Hebrew Bible in synagogue services. The chants are written and notated in accordance with the special signs or marks printed in the Masoretic text of the Hebrew Bible (or Tanakh) to complement the letters and vowel points…

A primary purpose of the cantillation signs is to guide the chanting of the sacred texts during public worship. Very roughly speaking, each word of text has a cantillation mark at its primary accent and associated with that mark is a musical phrase that tells how to sing that word…

Even the name of the symbols themselves, cantillation marks, gives us a sense of what they are and were used for, the cant- prefix meaning “to sing.”

Michael Ballam

A few weeks ago my wife heard some interesting commentary on this subject on a radio show on Classical 89 called “On Stage with Michael Ballam”.  Michael Ballam is the general director of the Utah Festival Opera, a professor of music at Utah State University, and a very accomplished operatic singer.  He also does some acting.

In his commentary on that program, Br. Ballam said that back in the 1990s he took a sabbatical to go to Israel, and one of the things he wanted to study was the art of cantillation, the way the scriptures are sung in the Jewish synagogue.  This is an ancient tradition, one that Br. Ballam says the Jewish tradition dates back to Moses:

How did Moses, the author of the Torah or The Law, the first five books of the Bible, convey the message to the children of Israel?  He wrote it down on stone or metallic plates of copra, gold etc; he sang the law to them. He couldn't pass around the law in those plates or in those stones. He would have to communicate orally and he did it by singing. The holy writings or scriptures were conveyed in an oral tradition from generation to generation by chanting. That tradition is called Hassan or hassanot in plural. That's why I went to Israel. I wanted to understand that tradition. Not having been brought up in that tradition I wanted to understand its derivation. Moses, Aaron and ultimately the Rabbis in the synagogues and temples would convey God's will through the means of singing his will. It is Jewish tradition that Moses was commanded of God to sing the scriptures to impress upon them their meanings, into their minds and into their hearts.

Br. Ballam wanted to be able to read, hear, and sing those scriptures the way they would have been sung by Moses, and the ancients, before they were written down:

Now, the tradition of chanting the Holy writings were passed down in an oral tradition per centuries until a group of Rabbis in Tiberius, on the Southern shore of the sea of Galilee, determined it was time to write it down, so that it could be more stable. There are a series of marking called Chantalatian markings, there is the prefix Chantalatian, are found in most credible Hebrew Bibles. They are written directly under the words and moved from right to left, remember Hebrew goes from right to left, English goes left to right. They indicate when the pitches go up, when the pitches go down, when they come to a stopping point and when they need to be embellished, given special emphasis. They are supposedly as close to what the children of Israel heard from Moses in the wilderness as possible. One of my goals in going to Israel was to find someone who could read those Chantalatian markings and tell me the authoritarian sound that went with them. I found such an expert, Israel Vault, in a Hebrew University. He began by chanting for me those first lines of the Torah, the Bible. “Bereshit bara Elohim et hashamayim ve’et ha’arets.” The pitch goes up on the word Eloh-im. Why? The name of the Supreme Deity. “ve’et ha’arets”. There is a punctuation there. It comes to a conclusion. That is we hear a cadence. It comes to an end, a period there.

To hear what those first lines of Genesis 1:1 sound like sung in Hebrew, press play in this audio clip:

This is where things got interesting for Br. Ballam.  The expert, Israel Vault, told Br. Ballam an amazing story, and asked him if he could explain it:

He came to America a number of years ago and was asked to speak in a university in New Mexico. He began to chant the Torah: “Bereshit bara Elohim et hashamayim ve’et ha’arets”. As he began to chant, he noticed a segment of the audience becoming very interested, even agitated by it. At the conclusion of the class was met by a group of students all of whom were Native Americans from a Tribe and they asked him a question. Where did you get that music? He said: well, I got it out of the Bible its right there; it has been there for centuries. Why do you ask? And the spokesperson for this group of Navajo students said: It's fascinating to us that, though the words are in a different, it's the same tune that our fathers used to explain the creation to our tradition. Then Israel said to me: I don't understand this. How could this group in another continent, from another separation of time have this same melody to describe creation from the same perspective that ancient Israel did? He asked me if perhaps, those Navajos could be part of the lineage of the tribes of Israel. Would they in fact be one of the lost tribes? I didn't have a definitive answer for him but it is very interesting that the same tune that described the creation of the world in ancient Israel is also the same tune that describes the same story in ancient and modern Navajo.

Hugh Nibley would probably explain the synchronicity by telling about the universality of the creation song:

The word for poetry, poiema, means “creation  of the world.”  The business of the Muses at the temple was to sing the creation song with the morning stars. Naturally, because they were dramatizing the story of the creation, too, the hymn was sung to music (some scholars derive the first writing from musical notation). The singing was performed in a sacred circle or chorus, so that poetry, music and dance go together. (Lucian’s famous essay on the ancient dance, among the earliest accounts, takes it back to the round dance in the temple, like the prayer circle that Jesus used to hold with the apostles and their wives -- Jesus standing at the altar in the arms of Adam, and the apostles’ wives standing in the circle with them. Some have referred to this as a dance; it is definitely a chorus.). So poetry, music, and dance go out to the world from the temple -- called by the Greeks the Mouseion, the shrine of the Muses.

The creation hymn was part of the great dramatic presentation that took place yearly at the temple; it dealt with the fall and redemption of man…

I don’t have a definitive answer either for why the sung Hebrew Bible would be familiar to Navajo Native Americans, but Nibley gives us a good candidate.  Music was used in the earliest of temples to convey the ritual to the initiates.  It was one of the only modes of transmission the people had to pass the story and rites on from one generation to another.  Might the music contained in the Hebrew Bible be the same music sung by the Native Americans to describe the creation story?  Might it be the same creation song that was heard in the temple anciently?  It’s possible.

~~~~~~~~

In other more personal news, I resigned from my job today.  I am a designer by profession, and unfortunately I became overqualified for my position.  If anyone is aware of design work or open designer positions available, I would appreciate any leads.  I do all kinds of design – product design, graphic design, web design, etc.  You can contact me here.

Here’s a link to my design portfolio:

http://brycehaymond.com/Bryce_Haymond_Portfolio.pdf

Thank you!

The Universal Creation Song

Ancient Israelite Temples Timeline (1300 BC--AD 100). Click on image for hi-res version.

Ancient Israelite Temples Timeline (1300 BC—AD 100) by Bryce Haymond is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. That means you can use this graphic however you please, as long as you attribute the original work to me and this website, and any derivatives must be licensed the same. See the Creative Commons link above for more details.

I am a visual learner in many ways, so sometimes I like to put things together visually so I can get a better grasp of them, and understand them more thoroughly.  The history of the ancient Israelite temples is one of those things that I wanted to learn better, so I created this timeline to help me visualize it.

The timeline shows the basic history of the ancient Israelite temples from the Tabernacle of Moses, through Solomon’s Temple (First Temple Period), the Babylonian Exile, and Zerubbabel’s and Herod’s Temples (Second Temple Period).  This spans about 1400 years.  Major temple structures are noted, as well as lesser known Israelite temples.  Major events which affected temple worship are marked and labeled, as well as other important dates.

The information on the timeline is sourced primarily from William Hamblin and David Seely’s excellent 2007 book, Solomon’s Temple: Myth and History (pages 9-49, 210).  Other information was found at various sources online.

I’m sure there are many details I’ve left out, and probably some errors.  If there are items that you think should be included (such as additional Israelite temples), please let me know.  If there are errors, please tell me those as well.  Just leave notes in the comments, and I will continually update the timeline here as I receive feedback.  Thanks!

Update (10/31/2009): I’ve updated the timeline. I’ve added some temples in the New World, including the temple in the city of Nephi, Zarahemla, and Bountiful. I’ve also added several more Old World temples including Arad, Meggido, Lachish, Beersheba, Gilgal, Ebal, Shechem, Shiloh, Kirjath-jearim, and Gibeon. Many of the dates are approximated. There are still more to add, as soon as I find more details.

Update (11/2/2009): I’ve decided to make this strictly an Old World temples timeline, so I’ve removed the few references to temples in the New World. I may make a separate timeline which compiles what we know of temples in the Book of Mormon. I’ve added some details about the ruling parties in Judea between 515 BC and AD 100. I’ve also added a visual reconstruction of what the Elephantine Temple may have looked like. Other small details have also been added.

Ancient Israelite Temples Timeline (1300 BC—AD 100)

The Tabernacle at Sunset - by Pat Marvenko Smith (click for larger view)

Note: I taught our Elders Quorum class today, and was assigned the topic of the Mosaic Tabernacle as a Temple.  Below are the notes and illustrations I used for my lesson.

Review of prior lesson on the exodus:

• Children of Israel escape Egyptian bondage (Ex. 14)
• Moses leads them out
• Parting of the Red Sea, Pharoah’s armies are drowned
• Lord begins to organize his people
• Manna rains down from heaven, sends Quail for meat (Ex. 16)
• Moses strikes the rock, and water comes out
• Lord covenants to Israel a peculiar treasure, a kingdom of priests, an holy nation (Ex. 19:5-6)
• 10 commandments and Mount Sinai (Ex. 20)
• The people start to refuse to become what the Lord had offered them – “Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.” (Ex. 20:19).  Foreshadowing…
• Many instructions, laws, covenants, etc. are delivered to Moses, which he delivers to the people, who all answer with one voice, “Yes, we will be obedient (Ex. 24:3, 7)

Moses goes up Mount Sinai again to receive instructions for 40 days and nights (Ex. 24:18).  Matthew Brown – “As part of his ascension experience, Moses is said to have been washed, anointed, clothed in heavenly garments, called with names of honor, enthroned, and initiated into heavenly secrets”.  Joseph Smith noted that Moses received the “keys of the Kingdom,” and “certain signs and words”. 

Next 7 chapters are instructions to Moses of how to build the Tabernacle while he is at Sinai.  Meanwhile the children of Israel are at base camp without their prophet, and things start to go bad.

Preliminary considerations – The Tabernacle functioned under the Aaronic priesthood, and as such things are different than we would expect from a temple functioning under the Melchizedek priesthood.  But much of the symbolism and typology remains the same.

Also, because of the translation, editing, and copying of the Bible through many generations, particularly during Josiah’s reforms, the Old Testament has some interpolations and insertions of Aaronic priesthood as the dominant authority throughout much of its history, even before the golden calf.  Some things seem out of place, anachronistic, counterintuitive, or unlogical (see for example Ex. 33 verses 11 and 20).  Some biblical scholars have noted that these are likely the result of later editing and rewriting.

Schematic drawing comparing Garden of Eden to Mosaic Tabernacle. From Temples of the Ancient World, Donald W. Parry, ed. (click for larger view)

Exodus 25 – Tabernacle, Tabernacle of the Congregation, Tabernacle of Witness or Tent of Witness, literally “Tent of Meeting” – Read Ex. 25:8-9 (first mention of Tabernacle).  Translated from two Hebrew words:

Garden of Eden as a prototype for the Tabernacle – temple functioned as a reversal of the effects of the Fall, and include many of the symbols in reverse order, going from the profane to the sacred:

The schematic drawing attempts to depict the sacred landscape of Genesis in simplified form.  The first land to arise from the waters became the Mountain of the Lord, where the Lord created Adam.  It is from this divine center that creation begins and extends out in all directions.  The Hebrew for east means “faceward or frontward”; thus, driving Adam from before his face is part of the continuing eastward movement.  Once a year on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, Adam’s eastward expulsion from the Garden is reversed when the high priest travels west past the consuming fire of the sacrifice and the purifying water of the laver, through the veil woven with images of cherubim.  Thus, he returns to the original point of creation, where he pours out the atoning blood of the sacrifice, reestablishing the covenant relationship with God.

Mosaic Tabernacle. From templebuilders.com (click for larger view)

Construction of the Tabernacle – Exodus 25-27 -

• Holy of Holies = Celestial
• Holy Place = Terrestrial (Garden?)
• Courtyard = Telestial
• Altar & Laver = sacrifice, obedience, baptism, washing
• Menorah = tree of life, the cross, the light of the world (Christ).. Fall
• Table of shewbread and wine = fruit of the tree of life, sacrament, flesh and blood of Christ.. Atonement
• Altar of incense = prayer, sacred ritual prayer, before the veil
• Veil = separation from God… we can rend through the rending of Christ’s flesh (Hebrews 10:19-20)
• Ark of the covenant = throne of God, immortality and eternal life

Aaron's holy garments (high priest). Diagram Illustrated by Janshen. (click for larger view)

Aaron’s holy garments (or all of Israel before their great sin) – Exodus 28 -

• Aaron’s garments consecrate him and allow him to minister as a priest. (Ex. 28:3).  Consecrate being translated from the Hebrew words meaning to “fill the hand” – sacrificial emblems, olive oil, incense.  The “filled hand” is a widespread sign of offering sacrifice.
• Breastplate (Ex. 28:4; includes many of the following items)
• Ephod = apron
  • Holman Bible Dictionary – “Priestly garment connected with seeking a word from God . . . In early OT history there are references to the ephod as a rather simple, linen garment, possibly a short skirt, apron, or loincloth.  It is identified as a priestly garment… From its earliest forms and uses, it appears that the ephod was associated with the presence of God or those who had a special relationship with God… There are references to a special ephod associated with the high priest.  It appears to have been an apron-like garment worn over the priest’s robe and under his breastplate… Woven of gold, blue, purple, and scarlet materials, it was very elaborate and ornate… The ephod was fastened around the waist by a beautiful and intricately woven girdle”.
• Robe
• Broidered (embroidered) coat = garment worn next to the skin
• Linen breeches (Ex. 28:42) = to cover nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach
• Mitre = a turban or round cap.  Something wrapped around with white linen.  Holman Bible Dictionary – “a type of headdress, probably a turban… In Zech. 3:5 the high priest Joshua received a clean mitre as a sign of the restoration of the priesthood”
• Girdle = sash – Holman Bible Dictionary – “An ornate sash worn by the officiating priests… to gird up one’s loins means literally to tuck the loose ends of one’s outer garment into one’s belt.  Loins were girded in preparation for running, battle, or for service for a master.  The call to ‘gird your minds’ means to be spiritually alert and prepared”.
• Bells on the hem (Ex. 28:35) = sound heard when he goes into the holy place, as an announcement
• Golden crown (Ex. 28:36) = HOLINESS TO THE LORD.  Taking upon him the name of the Lord, literally.
• Blue lace (Ex. 28:37) = a thread, a line, or cord; string to attach the crown, and secure it to the mitre.

Sons of Aaron (priests). (click for larger view)

Aaron’s sons garments – Ex. 28:40 -

• Coat
• Girdle
• Bonnet (hat or headdress)

Aaron and his sons were to be anointed, consecrated, and sanctified, and clothed in these holy garments so that they could minister in the priest’s office and come to the altar in the holy place. (Ex. 28:41-43; Ex. 29:29)

Exodus 29:4– “And Aaron and his sons thou shalt bring unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and shalt wash them with water.”

Clothing in the garments of the priesthood – Exodus 29:5-6

Exodus 29:7– “Then shalt thou take the anointing oil, and pour it upon his head, and anoint him.”

These things were done before the priests entered the holy place.  They were preparatory or initiatory ordinances to become ritually clean to serve in the Tabernacle.

Other offerings of animal sacrifices were offered on the altar.

The Tabernacle was to be a place of meeting the Lord and speaking with Him – Exodus 29:42-46 “This shall be a continual burnt offering throughout your generations at the door [veil?] of the tabernacle of the congregation before the Lord:  where I will meet you, to speak there unto thee.  And there I will meet with the children of Israel, and the tabernacle shall be sanctified by my glory… And I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God.  And they shall know that I am the Lord their God… that I may dwell among them: I am the Lord their God.”

All this was given to Moses while he was on Mount Sinai.  The children of Israel, meanwhile, were beginning to build idols, “which shall go before us” (Ex. 32).  Were desiring some intermediary to go before the Lord, now that Moses was gone, and they didn’t know if he was coming back (Ex. 32:1).

The Adoration of the Golden Calf, Nicolas Poussin, April 1633 (click for larger view)

Golden Calf!  Here is the turning point.  Moses comes down and breaks the tablets in his anger (Ex. 32:19, symbolic of the covenant being broken, literally).  The Lord chastises Israel for their great sin.  They will no longer be able to become a kingdom of priests – “Ye are a stiffnecked people: if I came up into the midst of thee in a moment, I would consume thee: therefore now put off thy ornaments from thee, that I may know what to do unto thee” (JST Ex. 33:5; see also Ezek. 24:17, 23).  The children of Israel can no longer come into the presence of the Lord because of their wickedness, and breaking their covenants.  The Lord commanded the Israelites to remove their “ornaments” (Ex. 33:4-6).  Matthew Brown suggests that this might have been connected with the “robes of . . . glory” that the Israelites were required to remove.  “These robes may be related to the ‘garments . . . for glory’ (i.e. temple robes) worn by the Israelite priests”.  Here we see that all the people were preparing to wear the sacred robes, not just Aaron and his sons.  But they were now unworthy of them.

Brigham Young once took note:

If they had been sanctified and holy, the children of Israel would not have traveled one year with Moses before they would have received their endowments and the Melchisedec Priesthood.”

Moses, and later on Aaron, become the intermediary for the people (Ex. 33:7-11).  They would go before the face of God, not the people.  We get more insight into what happened here in the Doctrine and Covenants (D&C 84:17-27).

17 Which priesthood continueth in the church of God in all generations, and is without beginning of days or end of years.
18 And the Lord confirmed a priesthood also upon Aaron and his seed, throughout all their generations, which priesthood also continueth and abideth forever with the priesthood which is after the holiest order of God.
19 And this greater priesthood administereth the gospel and holdeth the key of the mysteries of the kingdom, even the key of the knowledge of God.
20 Therefore, in the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest.
21 And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh;
22 For without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live.
23 Now this Moses plainly taught to the children of Israel in the wilderness, and sought diligently to sanctify his people that they might behold the face of God;
24 But they hardened their hearts and could not endure his presence; therefore, the Lord in his wrath, for his anger was kindled against them, swore that they should not enter into his rest while in the wilderness, which rest is the fulness of his glory.
25 Therefore, he took Moses out of their midst, and the Holy Priesthood also;
26 And the lesser priesthood continued, which priesthood holdeth the key of the ministering of angels and the preparatory gospel;
27 Which gospel is the gospel of repentance and of baptism, and the remission of sins, and the law of carnal commandments, which the Lord in his wrath caused to continue with the house of Aaron among the children of Israel until John, whom God raised up, being filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother's womb.

Moses goes back up the mountain to get the stone tablets again, but this time the covenant did not include the “everlasting covenant of the holy priesthood” that the people were not prepared to receive anymore (JST Deut 10:2).

1 And the Lord said unto Moses, Hew thee two other tables of stone, like unto the first, and I will write upon them also, the words of the law, according as they were written at the first on the tables which thou brakest; but it shall not be according to the first, for I will take away the priesthood out of their midst; therefore my holy order, and the ordinances thereof, shall not go before them; for my presence shall not go up in their midst, lest I destroy them. 2 But I will give unto them the law as at the first, but it shall be after the law of a carnal commandment; for I have sworn in my wrath, that they shall not enter into my presence, into my rest, in the days of their pilgrimage. (JST Ex. 34:1-2)

For the rest of Israelite history until the coming of Jesus Christ, the temple performed its functions primarily through the Aaronic priesthood, the authority to perform outward and carnal ordinances, but not the authority to bring mankind into the presence of the Father.  Christ restored what was lost through Israel’s iniquity, brought back the higher priesthood, reacquainted man with his Father, and restored the ordinances through which mankind may come once again into the presence of God.  These ordinances have been restored again today.

Here is another schematic drawing of the Tabernacle.

(To see more Tabernacle illustrations see TempleBuilders.com.)

Mosaic Tabernacle as an Aaronic Temple

Planet Earth

The account of the garden of Eden in Genesis is a very interesting story indeed.  We learn much about the experiences of our first parents and their interactions with God.  It was a very intimate relationship, one in which God walked and talked with Adam and Eve in the garden (Gen. 3:8).

When Adam was first placed in the garden of Eden, he was given a charge to take care of it:

And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. (Gen. 2:15)

The Hebrew word for “dress” is avad, which means to work, labor or serve.  Closely related is the word avodah, which means service.  Even at this early date man was given a stewardship over the earth, and to take good care of it, even while it was still paradisaical! When Adam and Eve transgressed the law of God and fell they were sent from the garden into the dreary world, but with the same charge of stewardship: 

Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. (Gen. 3:23)

The word used for “till” is again, avad.  Since this term also means “to serve,” one could easily misinterpret what man was being commanded to do in these instances.  Man was not being commanded to “serve the earth.” This was hardly the Gaia worship we see rampant in the world today (check out the link).  It was actually far from it, which can be clearly seen from the use of the same word, avad or avodah, throughout the rest of the scriptures.  Hamblin and Seely inform us:

The same word God used when he commanded Adam and Eve to “work” in the Garden--avodah--is used to describe the “service” of the Tabernacle performed by the priesthood.

The “work” of man on the earth was to be tied directly to his worship of God, not the earth. Donald W. Parry expounds further on the meaning of these words in his latest paper in the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies:

As we are aware, the Old Testament sets forth a strong connection between temples and service. The Hebrew words ʿavodah (service) and ʿavad (serve) frequently refer to the ancient Israelite temple system. In fact, some Hebrew scholars and lexicographers disclose that the verb ʿavad, often translated “to work” or “to serve,” also means “to worship” or “to perform a (cultic) rite,” referring specifically to temple worship.

In this connection, service and serve occur approximately sixty times in the Hebrew Bible with regard to the Levite task of dismantling, transporting, and reassembling the Mosaic tabernacle. Service and serve also occur with regard to other official duties connected to the tabernacle (and later the temple), including the guard duty of the structure and its courtyard, the system of sacrifices, and the upkeep and care of the sacred furniture, utensils, and instruments.

The expressions “service of the tabernacle” (Hebrew, ʿavodat hammishkan) and “to do the service of the tabernacle” (Hebrew, laʿavod ʾet ʿavodat hammishkan) are both formulaic or standard phrases (see Numbers 3:7-8; Numbers 7:5, 9; Numbers 8:22; Numbers 16:9; Numbers 18:4, 6, 21, 23, 31). After the tabernacle was permanently dismantled and Solomon’s temple was built, the formula “service of the tabernacle” was discontinued. It was replaced with the expression “service of the house of God” or “service of the house of the Lord,” referring to Solomon’s temple. These phrases also became formulaic, especially in Chronicles (see 1 Chronicles 9:13; 1 Chronicles 23:28, 32; 1 Chronicles 28:13).

The picture that we begin to see here is that avad and avodah have a much deeper and rich meaning than simple work or labor.  Such earthly work and labor were to be focused on serving and worshiping the God of heaven and earth. When Adam and Eve and their posterity went to “dress” the garden, or “till” the ground, they were to keep in mind Him who made it all for them, for it was the stewardship that He gave them to do it in the first place.

An interesting connection that also comes to mind is God’s statement to Adam and Eve:

In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread [lehem], till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. (Gen. 3:19)

Was this sweat and labor to be completely detached from the worship of God?

Tabernacle Coverings

As one begins to study the history of the tabernacle of Moses and its construction, it becomes clear that those who ministered in this temple probably endured some intense heat.  First of all, the Israelites were wandering in a desert where the climate was likely arid and hot. Combine this with the coverings over the tabernacle proper:

The solid structure of the tabernacle was overspread by four separate and distinct coverings.  The innermost of these enclosures was a “tabernacle” (miskan) made of fine-twined linen followed by a “tent” (ohel) of black goat’s hair, a “covering” (mikseh) of ram skins that had been dyed red, and then a “covering” (mikseh) of dolphin skins (see Exodus 36:8-19).

The tabernacle was extremely well-insulated.  While this likely protected the sacred interiors from the elements of the desert outside, as well as being symbolic, it undoubtedly also produced sauna-like conditions inside the structure.

Table of Shewbread

One of the few objects placed inside the tabernacle was the table of shewbread.  There were twelve loaves of this unleavened bread stacked in two rows of equal numbers.  As Matthew Brown acutely writes, “In Hebrew, ’shewbread’ actually consists of two separate words--(paneh, face) and (lehem, bread)--hence a literal translation would be ‘bread of the face’ (the bread that sits before the face of Jehovah) or, as many translators prefer, ‘bread of the presence’ (the bread that sits in the presence of Jehovah)”.  Could this “bread of the face” have also had reference to the faces of the priests, who literally took upon themselves (and particularly their foreheads) the name of Yahweh in the Holy Place, and whose faces sweated to produce the bread and to partake of it weekly? Part of the priestly liturgy was to consume this bread, along with wine, while inside the sweltering tabernacle:

The priests were to gather inside the Holy Place every Sabbath day and consume the bread that lay upon the golden table (see Leviticus 24:8-9).

Later, from the New Testament we learn that Christ was the “true bread” and the “true vine,” which became memorialized in the Christian sacrament or Eucharist.

So was the Lord’s injunction that “in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread” solely a command to go to work on the earth to provide for oneself and forget one’s relationship with God in the garden, or did it also have reference to worship in the temple, tending to the earth to keep it in a temple-like state, service to God, remembering the atoning sacrifice of the Savior, and that all the things of the earth ultimately come from God, even our daily bread? (D&C 104:13-18; Matt. 6:11).

We should keep all of this in mind as we go to work each day and are good stewards of the earth, that God is our ultimate authority and sovereign, and that all labor and environmental obligations are subservient to Him and none else, and that all our passions are to be kept bridled within the limits prescribed by the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.

Service on Earth & Worship of God

Someone recently asked me the following:

Perhaps you can explain how a person who finds the [temple experience] to be … troubling should express those feelings.

This was my reply, with additional edits: 

I think that would depend on if they are a member of the Church or not.  I also think it goes beyond how they should express the feelings, to what should they do about them.

If not a member, I'm not sure why something that we do in the sacred seclusion and confines of our temples should disturb such a person at all since they don't participate in it, and it in no way affects their way of life or beliefs. I would submit that someone like this doesn’t really know the temple even if they think they do, since they do not have first-hand experience, and so it is difficult for them to rightly discern.  The sacred things of the temple, when purloined from that holy environment, lose their godly nature and divine sanction. This is why we refrain from speaking of their details outside of that sacred space.  In a profane context, the temple doesn’t make sense.  If this truly disturbs someone, a careful inventory of how they react generally to external factors outside their control in their life might be in order.  There are a great many things that other people do in private that have no bearing whatsoever on the way I live my life.

If they are a member of the Church, then I believe further learning of the extensive history of temples and temple worship since the beginning of time is great counsel, since similar worship practices, rituals, ceremonies and liturgies have been practiced by mankind since their creation.  A reading list of books on the temple would help familiarize them with the language of symbolism, ritual, formal worship, the covenant-making process, parallels among early Christians and other ancient civilizations, religious mysticism, and the meaning behind the temple ordinances.  Professor Andrew Skinner’s latest book Temple Worship is an excellent first recourse.

Even with this understanding, a member’s first experiences in the temple may still be peculiar to them in some regard.  I think this is natural, and may be by design.  The Lord's ways are not our ways (Isa. 55:8-9" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview('/outbound/comment/scriptures.lds.org');" href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/isa/55/8-9#8">Isa. 55:8-9). The things of God and His temples are not even remotely aligned with the ways of the world, because they are a reflection of heaven, and are always found starkly in contrast with all mundane trivialities. This could potentially strike new temple attendees as odd or different. But such ceremonies have always stood out in distinctiveness from the rest of man’s affairs, even in one of the earliest sacred structures, Moses’ Tabernacle.  How would the rest of the world have viewed that form of Israelite worship?  The earliest Christian initiations were likewise extraordinary, and for a divine purpose. Edward Yarnold, a research lecturer at Oxford University, has written about the early Christian ordinances thus:

'The awe-inspiring rites' – the words recur several times in these pages. Without being unfaithful to the Greek, I might have called this book 'The Spine-chilling Rites of Initiation.' It takes the form of a collection of sermons, all preached about the second half of the fourth century, explaining the sacraments of baptism, confirmation, and Holy Communion by which a Christian became a full member of the Church. The ceremonies took place at night some of them in the dark, after weeks of intense preparation; they were wrapped in secrecy, and the candidate knew little about them until just before, or even after, he had received them. Everything was calculated to inspire religious awe, to make these rites the occasion of a profound and life-long conversion.

Prayerful and scriptural introspection and study would be valuable to any temple-going Latter-day Saint to consider in order to gain personal testimony that the temple is the House of the Lord. Discussion with a bishop, teacher, friend, or family member about such feelings might also help. Generally, the more one knows the ways of the Lord, the more the temple fits perfectly into His model of the eternities and the more one recognizes the profound blessing it is to worship and serve in His temple.

I testify that the temple is the Lord’s House, His presence dwells there, His angels abide there, He has revealed the ordinances in our day, and such revelation is evidence of the divine calling of the Prophet Joseph Smith.  The atonement of Jesus Christ is epitomized in the teachings and ritual experience of the temple, and one can grow nearer to God, our Heavenly Father, by serving and sacrificing personal will there, just as Christ did, in the House of the Lord.

Is the Temple Troubling?

I had contemplated entitling this post “A Change in Temple Sacrifice Following Christ,” but since today is Father’s Day, I thought this title was more appropriate.

From the time they left Jerusalem until the time of Christ’s ministry among his descendants in the Americas 600 years later, Lehi and his family offered sacrifice and burnt offerings to the Lord (1 Ne. 5:9; 1 Ne. 7:22; Mosiah 2:3). Such was part of the law of Moses which they sought to keep diligently, as the Israelites had been observing for thousands of years (Mosiah 12:28-29; Mosiah 13:27-28; Alma 25:15-16; 2 Ne. 25:24, 30; Alma 30:3). But even then, they remembered that the law of Moses was in similitude of the great sacrifice of the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was to come to the earth and work out an infinite atonement by the shedding of his blood and body (Alma 34:14).

When Christ visited the inhabitants of the Americas he explained how the law of Moses was fulfilled in him, and how things were to become new:

And he said unto them: Marvel not that I said unto you that old things had passed away, and that all things had become new.
Behold, I say unto you that the law is fulfilled that was given unto Moses.
Behold, I am he that gave the law, and I am he who covenanted with my people Israel; therefore, the law in me is fulfilled, for I have come to fulfil the law; therefore it hath an end. (3 Ne. 15:3-5)

The law of Moses was fulfilled, but this did not mean that the covenant ended:

For behold, the covenant which I have made with my people is not all fulfilled; but the law which was given unto Moses hath an end in me. (3 Ne. 15:8)

The type of sacrifices that would be offered from that time forth was to be of a different nature:

And ye shall offer up unto me no more the shedding of blood; yea, your sacrifices and your burnt offerings shall be done away, for I will accept none of your sacrifices and your burnt offerings.
And ye shall offer for a sacrifice unto me a broken heart and a contrite spirit. And whoso cometh unto me with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, him will I baptize with fire and with the Holy Ghost . . . (3 Ne. 9:19-20)

But how is a broken heart and a contrite spirit a sacrifice? Elder Bruce D. Porter explained this in his October 2007 General Conference address entitled “A Broken Heart and a Contrite Spirit“:

As in all things, the Savior’s life offers us the perfect example: though Jesus of Nazareth was utterly without sin, He walked through life with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, as manifested by His submission to the will of the Father. ‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me’ (John 6:38). To His disciples He said, ‘Learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart’ (Matthew 11:29). And when the time came to pay the ultimate sacrifice entailed in the Atonement, Christ shrank not to partake of the bitter cup but submitted completely to His Father’s will.

The Savior's perfect submission to the Eternal Father is the very essence of a broken heart and a contrite spirit. Christ's example teaches us that a broken heart is an eternal attribute of godliness. When our hearts are broken, we are completely open to the Spirit of God and recognize our dependence on Him for all that we have and all that we are. The sacrifice so entailed is a sacrifice of pride in all its forms. Like malleable clay in the hands of a skilled potter, the brokenhearted can be molded and shaped in the hands of the Master.

Even the Psalmist understood, at the time of the law of Moses, that the ultimate sacrifice we must make is of a broken heart and contrite spirit. Those ancient Israelites submitted themselves to the will of Jehovah as they offered animal sacrifice and burnt offerings:

For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.
The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. (Psalms 51:16-17)

The prophet Samuel also understood this:

And Samuel said, Hath the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams. (1 Sam. 15:22)

As in all things, we are taught that we must follow Christ’s example, and emulate Him, and as we do so we receive His image in our countenances (Alma 5:14, 19; cf. 1 Jn. 3:1-3). These things we do as we covenant in the temple to obey God in all things, and submit our will to the will of the Father, just as the Savior did. We sacrifice and offer our will, and all things temporal and spiritual in our lives, to our Father’s will. We say, following Christ, “Not my will, but thine, be done” (Luke 22:42). Under the Mosaic law the submission of will was in outward performances, but thereafter it became an inward sacrifice (Alma 25:15-16).

Sacrificing our will to the will of our Father

One of our readers, Dr. Kathy Larsen, pointed out a scripture yesterday that intrigued me. It is Leviticus 21:10:

And he that is the high priest among his brethren, upon whose head the anointing oil was poured, and that is consecrated to put on the garments, shall not uncover his head, nor rend his clothes;

There is a footnote on the second instance of the word “that” in our LDS King James Version. The footnote reads “HEB (literally) whose hand is filled; i.e. who is equipped, or authorized.” This means that the original Hebrew would have read something like, “and whose hand is filled to put on the garments.” Apparently the word translated as “consecrated” came from a Hebrew phrase for “a filled hand” or “a full hand.”

I did a little bit of digging into this, and found some more interesting things related to this. Now, first understand that I am not a Hebrew scholar; I’m not even an amateur. I have just barely begun learning some basic Hebrew. So if I am way off, I’m sure there are those who will correct me. It takes a few stumbles to learn how to walk.

The Hebrew words that have been translated as “consecrated” are male’ (מלא – Strong’s 04390) and yad (י�" – Strong’s 03027). The transliterated word male’ most commonly means “to fill,” “be full,” or “to be filled.” It was translated 107 times in the KJV as “fill,” and 48 times as “full.” It was only translated as “consecrate(d)” about 17 times (see below). Each time it is translated as “consecrate(d),” the word yad accompanies it. Yad almost always means a “hand” (1359 times in the KJV OT). It can also be a symbol of strength or power, or even as a “sign.”

Many of the male’ yad (phonetically “maw-lay’ yawd”) combinations are found in the account of Moses and Aaron, but there are other instances that follow through Ezekiel, but always in connection with the temple. In each of these cases where the King James translators used the word “consecrate(d)” the original Hebrew read “a filled hand,” “a full hand,” “hand is filled,” “fill the hand,” or something similar:

1. Ex. 28:41– And thou shalt put them upon Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him; and shalt anoint them, and consecrate them, and sanctify them, that they may minister unto me in the priest’s office.
2. Ex. 29:9– And thou shalt gird them with girdles, Aaron and his sons, and put the bonnets on them: and the priest’s office shall be theirs for a perpetual statute: and thou shalt consecrate Aaron and his sons.
3. Ex. 29:29– And the holy garments of Aaron shall be his sons’ after him, to be anointed therein, and to be consecrated in them.
4. Ex. 29:33– And they shall eat those things wherewith the atonement was made, to consecrate [and] to sanctify them: but a stranger shall not eat [thereof], because they [are] holy.
5. Ex. 29:35– And thus shalt thou do unto Aaron, and to his sons, according to all [things] which I have commanded thee: seven days shalt thou consecrate them.
6. Ex. 32:29– For Moses had said, Consecrate yourselves to day to the LORD, even every man upon his son, and upon his brother; that he may bestow upon you a blessing this day.
7. Lev. 8:33– And ye shall not go out of the door of the tabernacle of the congregation [in] seven days, until the days of your consecration be at an end: for seven days shall he consecrate you.
8. Lev. 16:32– And the priest, whom he shall anoint, and whom he shall consecrate to minister in the priest’s office in his father’s stead, shall make the atonement, and shall put on the linen clothes, [even] the holy garments:
9. Lev. 21:10– And [he that is] the high priest among his brethren, upon whose head the anointing oil was poured, and that is consecrated to put on the garments, shall not uncover his head, nor rend his clothes;
10. Num. 3:3– These [are] the names of the sons of Aaron, the priests which were anointed, whom he consecrated to minister in the priest’s office.
11. Judg. 17:5– And the man Micah had an house of gods, and made an ephod, and teraphim, and consecrated one of his sons, who became his priest.
12. Judg. 17:12– And Micah consecrated the Levite; and the young man became his priest, and was in the house of Micah.
13. 1 Kgs. 13:33– After this thing Jeroboam returned not from his evil way, but made again of the lowest of the people priests of the high places: whosoever would, he consecrated him, and he became [one] of the priests of the high places.
14. 1 Chr. 29:5– The gold for [things] of gold, and the silver for [things] of silver, and for all manner of work [to be made] by the hands of artificers. And who [then] is willing to consecrate his service this day unto the LORD?
15. 2 Chr. 13:9– Have ye not cast out the priests of the LORD, the sons of Aaron, and the Levites, and have made you priests after the manner of the nations of [other] lands? so that whosoever cometh to consecrate himself with a young bullock and seven rams, [the same] may be a priest of [them that are] no gods.
16. 2 Chr. 29:31– Then Hezekiah answered and said, Now ye have consecrated yourselves unto the LORD, come near and bring sacrifices and thank offerings into the house of the LORD. And the congregation brought in sacrifices and thank offerings; and as many as were of a free heart burnt offerings.
17. Ezek. 43:26– Seven days shall they purge the altar and purify it; and they shall consecrate themselves.

There are other instances in which the word “consecrate(d)” was translated from a different Hebrew word, but the male’ yad combination is the most common.

The yod (י) Hebrew character itself is of interest here as well (probably where we get our English letter I). The original pictograph from which this character developed was of a squared arm and hand:

It is thought that this character may have descended from the Egyptian hieroglyphic of an arm and hand:

This hieroglyphic could have been a representation of a common Egyptian censer, or incense vessel, that was used.

As can be seen in the painting at the beginning of this post, the incense was moved from place to place in the holy place with the use of an incense shovel or spoon. The Temple Institute has reproduced what they think this may have looked like:

Even more ancient, however, the Egyptians had a similar tool for offering incense to the gods. I believe this is an authentic Egyptian censer:

The unique thing about this instrument is the sculpted cupped hand at the end of the tool. A drawing of it can be seen here. This tool being used by an Egyptian can be seen here, or offering incense straight from the hand here. A modern studio recreation of this instrument can be seen here, which they call “An Heru.” Notice that sometimes it appears that the incense was offered directly from the hand, whereas in other instances it was in a bowl held in a cupped hand. Other Egyptian examples can be seen here, or here, or here, or here, and here.

Why the symbolic use of a cupped hand to offer incense? Dr. Hugh Nibley taught:

Incense was often burned in special holders made in the form of a cupped hand, the “golden spoons” of Exodus 25:29 . . . the “filled hand” (the Hebrew letter kaph כ means “palm”) is the widespread sign of offering sacrifice.

Nibley brings up another interesting Hebrew letter, the kaph כ (probably where we get our English letter K). The original pictograph for this letter looks like this:

The Egyptian representation of this pictograph was:

Kaph literally means “palm” in Hebrew, and represents:

. . . the open palm of a hand. The meanings of this letter are bend and curve from the shape of the palm as well as to tame or subdue as one who has been bent to another’s will.

Hebrew4Christians.com has some interesting commentary about this letter also:

The literal meaning of Kaf is "palm" which is considered the location where potential of the Yod (hand) is actualized (interestingly, the gematria for the word Yod is the same for the letter Kaf). For this reason we bless children with palms facing them and we envision God as having His palms over us, for this image suggests the calling forth of the latent power of the spirit within for manifestation in the physical world. . . .

The word Kaf means "palm" of a hand and also what might be contained within the palm of the hand. The word "spoon" in Hebrew is the word Kaf, which is a natural extension of the palm as a container.

So bringing all of this together, when we read of God commanding Moses and Aaron to be “consecrated,” or to “consecrate,” the Hebrew words behind this term connote filling a cupped hand with incense in order to make sacrificial offerings to God in His holy place of the temple.

Consecrate = “A Filled Hand” in Hebrew

The other article that impressed me from the latest Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, 16/2 (2007), was Donald W. Parry’s “Service and Temple in King Benjamin’s Speech.” Why did it impress me? Because it related subjects in the Book of Mormon to the temple, something that we haven’t seen a lot of yet, but is becoming more common in recent days. Some of our detractors like to criticize the fact that the Book of Mormon appears to have little content related to the temple, while on the other hand the Church emphasizes the importance of the temple and the ordinances that occur therein. It is articles such as this one in the JBMS that clearly show otherwise. The temple plays a central role in the gospel, even in the text of the Book of Mormon, but we must be willing to look for it, and search a little deeper. I can attest that once you have this focus, the temple appears everywhere in this book of scripture as it does in all scripture.

In his article Dr. Parry writes of many allusions to the temple in the setting of and the address of King Benjamin’s speech, mostly from Mosiah 2. The most direct and obvious connection is that King Benjamin gave the address from a tower which was built just in front of the temple in the city of Zarahemla (Mosiah 2:7). The people came in a “sacred pilgrimage to a holy sanctuary--ascending or going up to a holy place”. The temple is mentioned five times in the first seven verses of the chapter. Such repetition gives the temple a dominant place and emphasis in this text, one that we might not casually see. The people literally gathered “round about the temple” and faced their tents “towards the temple” to hear the words of King Benjamin (Mosiah 2:6). The symbolism here could not be more clear--the people were coming to the temple to be taught from on High. The temple is a source and place of learning, but only a singular type of learning happens here--it is the teaching from God.

Parry continues by pointing out that before the king gave his speech, there were temple ordinances performed:

…there is a pointed statement about the temple’s sacrificial system: “They also took of the firstlings of their flocks, that they might offer sacrifice and burnt offerings according to the law of Moses” (Mosiah 2:3). Some of these offerings were likely thanksgiving offerings (see Mosiah 2:4, “that they might give thanks to the Lord their God”).

The most interesting connection Parry cites between King Benjamin’s speech and the temple is service:

…Benjamin invited his people to the setting of the temple, a holy place of sacred service, so that he could more effectively teach regarding service to God and service to one’s fellow beings.

Dr. Parry shows that the words servants, serve, served, and service (all used heavily by King Benjamin) are tied to the ancient Mosaic sacrificial system expounded in the Bible, particularly by those who participated in the rites at the tabernacle and Solomon’s temple. Even these very words were used to refer to the temple:

In fact, some Hebrew scholars and lexicographers disclose that the verb ‘avad, often translated “to work” or “to serve,” also means “to worship” or “to perform a (cultic) rite,” referring specifically to temple worship.

He also shows that the sprinkling of the sacrifice’s blood onto the altar shows up when Benjamin refers to blood on his garments (Mosiah 2:27-28):

One may speculate that prior to speaking to the people Benjamin offered sacrifices himself and had blood on his garments that he was unable to remove before his speech.

The subjects of garments, human blood, and the removal of that blood appear in King Benjamin’s speech, as well as several other passages in the Book of Mormon, and all have a direct connection to the offering of sacrifices upon the altar according to the law of Moses. These passages are compared to others which place us, fallen sons and daughters of God, as symbolic of the stained garments, and Christ’s atoning blood as the power to cleanse those garments from sin. As Dr. Parry well says:

King Benjamin’s discourse on service in its temple setting--where sacrifices were made under the law of Moses--ultimately points to the supreme and final service: Jesus Christ’s atoning sacrifice.

This article is an excellent example of looking deeper into the text of the Book of Mormon and seeing things that we might easily pass over in casual reading. Indeed, here we see the temple, and the sacrifices and offerings to God performed within, as prominent as ever.

King Benjamin and the Temple

I used to ask myself that question, and I believe that many others probably still do. We believe that our current temple ordinances as revealed by the prophet Joseph Smith are as old as the human race, and were first revealed to Adam, the Ancient of Days. So why don’t we read more about temple practices similar to our own today in the Old Testament? It can get very confusing trying to compare our modern-day temple ordinances to those of Moses in the Tabernacle, or Solomon’s temple, or even Herod’s temple at the time of Christ. And our critics also love to point out the dissimilarity.

The ordinances just aren’t the same. We might initially think that it is because of the sacredness of the temple that it was kept from being written about much by the ancient patriarchs. But this is not the case. Many details are given about the Tabernacle of Moses in the first books of the Bible. While there are still some similitudes in the structure of the temples, the priestly clothing, and even in the rites, if the ordinances were the same or very similar as we have them today we would find many more allusions to them. But they just aren’t there.

So where are they? The reason we don’t find them is in large part due to the fact that for the majority of the Old Testament times Israel was living under the lesser Aaronic priesthood, with its accompanying ordinances, and not the higher priesthood of Melchizedek, with its accompanying ordinances.

A reader of yesterday’s post on the apocryphal Testament of Levi commented that “I don't always know what to make of these parallels… Clearly, Levitical temple practices were not identical to modern LDS ones. Yet, there are correlations.”

You are right that the temple practices of the Levites, during the Mosaic law as we read from the Bible, were not like modern LDS ones. In fact they were quite different. The reason is because at that point Israel was living under the lesser priesthood, the Aaronic, and not the Melchizedek. Therefore, the ordinances that they performed were only pertaining to the lesser priesthood, and were outward and pertained to carnal commandments. This apostasy lasted 1200-1300 years, until the time of Christ, and is why we don’t see much of the higher ordinances in the Old Testament. Dr. Skinner points out, “Apostasy is really a function of the lack of authorized temples and associated priesthood ordinances as much as anything else”. The Old Testament writers begin with Moses and end 500 years or so before the time of Christ, precisely during the time when the House of Israel was solely under the administration of the Aaronic (and Levitical) Priesthood.

But as Dr. Andrew Skinner teaches, “the ordinances practiced by the patriarchs from Adam to Moses were administered under the authority and power of the Melchizedek Priesthood”. That means that before the time of Moses and the exodus, the ordinances of the gospel were much more like those we have today (except they also practiced animal sacrifice). Skinner informs us, “possessing the Melchizedek Priesthood, Abraham could participate in every temple ordinance available to us living today, including the sealing ordinance, which he did (D&C 132:37)”. From the temple we know that Adam also participated in all the ordinances of the gospel, including the ones we know today. We might also infer that the other ancient patriarchs Enoch, Melchizedek, Noah, Isaac, Jacob, and his twelve sons also participated in the higher ordinances of the gospel under the Melchizedek priesthood, the same as we have today.

Levi and his sons would have had all the ordinances of the temple we have today, including washings, anointings, investitures, ascension rites, coronations, etc., which is in line with the Testament of Levi that I analyzed in the post yesterday. The Testament of Levi is attributed to be from Levi, and even if that is not the case, the ordinances and rites that the author describes could easily be attributed to the time period of Levi, since at that time they had the higher priesthood and the higher ordinances of the gospel. That is a plausible reason for the many similarities and parallels that we see in that apocryphal work, and others, which correlate strongly with our current temple worship.

It was not until the time of Moses, the exodus, the golden calf, Moses going up the mountain again to bring down the lesser law, and the institution of the lesser priesthood that the ordinances changed dramatically from what we have today. It was at this time that the Levites practiced the lesser ordinances as we read about them in the Bible. Skinner notes, “The Joseph Smith Translation of Exodus 34:1 states that in addition to taking away the higher priesthood, the Lord took away his ‘holy order, and the ordinances thereof.’ Practically speaking, this means that the Mosaic Tabernacle, Solomon’s Temple, and the later Temple of Herod did not administer the full range of the priesthood ordinances (including sealings performed by Melchizedek Priesthood officiators) to Israel as a whole”. For many years, only the prophet was allowed to hold the Melchizedek Priesthood, and among those certain individuals likely received all the ordinances associated with the higher priesthood. But Israel at large, for a long time, did not participate in them.

Christ brought back, or restored, the higher priesthood of Melchizedek, the higher law, and the higher ordinances of that priesthood. The church was again as it was before the time of Moses, minus animal sacrifices after Christ’s death, and also like it is today with a fulness of the gospel. There are actually many more allusions in the New Testament to practices which closely parallel our modern-day temple experience than in the Old Testament (see this excellent list of sacred secrecy in the New Testament, and these hints at sacred ordinances). In the last verses of Luke, Christ gives the promise of an endowment to his disciples if they wait for it in Jerusalem, after which they rush back to Jerusalem and wait in the temple (Luke 24:49-53). Christ was bringing the higher ordinances back to Israel, and later opened them up for the world (the Gentiles) to participate in.

Unfortunately, the world lost the priesthood altogether and its associated ordinances shortly after the time of Christ, and there ensued another Great Apostasy. This time all priesthood and ordinances were taken from the earth, and the people knew not where to find the Lord. Amos prophesied this day:

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord:

And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it. (Amos 8:11)

Many centuries later a prophet was called once again, Joseph Smith, to restore the higher priesthood of Melchizedek (and the Aaronic), the higher law, and the higher ordinances of that priesthood to us today.

Why Don’t we Find Our Modern Temple in the Old Testament?

One of the criticisms leveled at the LDS (Mormon) practice of temple worship is the seemingly dissimilar forms of the ordinances when compared with those found practiced by ancient Israelites in the Bible. It is true that the forms of the ordinances and sacrifices are different, but their meaning and symbolism remain the same. Let us consider why the forms are different.

From Adam down to Moses, the Melchizedek priesthood, with its accompanying higher ordinances, were practiced by the covenant people of the Lord. These were similar in form to LDS temple worship today. Unfortunately, since most of the accounting from the Old Testament takes place from the time period of Moses to Christ, from the Bible we become most familiar with the lower ordinances that the Israelites practiced in the Tabernacle, Solomon’s Temple, Zerubbabel’s Temple, and Herod’s Temple. This is because when Moses desired to give the higher law of the gospel and the ordinances of the Melchizedek priesthood to his people they rebelled against him and the Lord withdrew these higher ordinances and instituted the lower Aaronic priesthood (including the Levitical priesthood) with its accompanying outwardly observances and performances. The Israelites were not worthy to come into the presence of the Lord as a whole; only the high priest was allowed into the most holy place in the Tabernacle, and only on certain prescribed days. These practices continued for 1200-1300 years, and the Israelites’ writings during this time fill a large measure of the Bible.

When Christ came to earth, he restored the Melchizedek priesthood with its accompanying higher ordinances. The Mosaic law was also fulfilled in Christ at that time, and the type of sacrifices performed in temples were consequently changed. Blood sacrifices were no longer required. Intermediary animals were also now not required. All of the Lord’s covenant people were able to approach the Lord directly and offer a self-sacrifice of their time, talents, and everything that they had, including the only true sacrifice we can give God, our individual will. The form of the sacrifice changed, but the meaning and symbolism remained exactly the same.

Yesterday and today, the ordinances and sacrifices offered in the Lord’s temples have always pointed to Jesus Christ and his ultimate sacrifice and atonement. The following table helps compare the types and forms of sacrifice offered in the temple of the Lord since Adam to the present day:

Sacrifice Continues in the Temple