This will be my only post today since I have to go to work shortly (sadly the hospital doesn't close on Sundays
).
I think that you are missing the nuance of what I have presented. Your focus is on the temple. I have stated that temples existed of old. That the same ordinances existed of old. But I have not stated that the ordinances are always performed in the temple. That is what you are saying.
See below:
Yes, that is what I'm saying. I am stating a position that is similar to that given in "Why Mormons Build Temples", which states that the sacred ordinances administered anciently in the Tabernacle and the Jerusalem Temple have been provided once again by the Lord in our day. So, I'm interested in evidences that the ordinances administered anciently in those holy edifices are indeed the same ordinances performed in LDS temples today.
I'm not sure what answer you are expecting. The article answers your question and it also deals with the point of misunderstanding above. Let's take a look:
See above.
Holy places were tabernacles and temples. I suspect that many baptisms were performed in neither of them, instead taking place at a nearby river. This is a technical point to be sure, but I want to be clear on the matter.
Ok, so that is your speculation on the matter. The point is that neither baptisms for the living nor baptisms for the dead were performed in the temple, as they are today.
Interestingly, President Packer, in the video "Mormon Temples: A Conversation With a Church Leader", seems not to be clear on this point. When talking about baptism for the dead, he mentions how the baptismal font is on the back of twelve oxen. He then says that "this was just as was done in ancient Israel, as is detailed in 1 Kings chapter 7", which says that "it" stood on the backs of 12 oxen, and that "that's the same pattern that we have in our temple". Sadly, some may not realize that while structurally it certainly is the same, the brazen sea on the backs of twelve oxen in the Bible was not used for proxy baptisms as is done today, but was used for priestly purification prior to performing the rites. So, this is one more way in which LDS temples simply are not like the Jerusalem Temple.
And I have already confirmed that we build temples and we perform ordinances. The practice of both being restored by Joseph Smith.
That being said, the work being done in LDS temples is a restoration of the work and ordinances that were performed previously.
Right, and as I've said, I'm interested in
how it is a restoration, a bringing back of something that was had before, and historical, objective evidences supporting that.
As an aside, Catholics understand our churches, cathedrals, basilicas, etc as continuing in the temple tradition (see Margaret Barker and her work for more on that). We believe, as Dr. Scott Hahn says on the back cover of the book "The Church: Unlocking the Secrets to the Places Catholics Call home", that "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." The division of the church building parallels that of the Temple. There is water purification before one enters. Incense burns. There is a sacrificial priesthood offering sacrifice to God. Psalms are sung (the psalms are understood to be temple hymns). And of course the presence of God is believed to be there. While we don't claim to be a restoration or even an exact replica of the ancient temple in Jerusalem, it is clear that there are real similarities and continuity with the Temple tradition of old. I'm really not so sure with the LDS temples.
There is also no place for animal sacrifice. So even Biblically we see some changes taking place.
Right. However there were also unbloody sacrifices in the temple offered by the priests that ran it. The LDS temples do not have those either, or anything similar.
And I doubt that every temple that was built anciently had exactly the same room structure. And based on what has already been presented, it needn't be. The above quote already points out that they had tabernacles while traveling in the wilderness. Obviously, that is different from the permanent temples that were later built.
A pattern doesn't mean an exact duplicate. It means similar, following in a like manner. For the LDS there isn't a problem with building temples that look different from one another. They are buildings. While they are important as the House of God, what really matters are the ordinances performed inside.
Ok. How many temples do you believe were built? The Tabernacle and the Temple essentially had the same room structure, didn't they? They both had the outer courtyard, the holy place, and the most holy place.
I imagine they were performed in a nearby river.
See above.
On me? No. I would have to do some research. However, since you asked what LDS feel/believe on the matter I am not inclinded to spend the time to do so. I'm not interested in attempting to convince you of anything.
I also specifically asked for evidences. If I wasn't clear earlier, I meant historical, verifiable evidences for an actual restoration of what was done in the tabernacle and temple anciently. Since it seems that you haven't really done research on the matter, then perhaps another Latter-day Saint has. I'm not really interested in speculations and imagining, though I appreciate reading how you view the matter.
As far as I know, the Bible doesn't spell out what ordinances were performed there. My reason for mentioning it is to present that something was being done and that leaves a reasonable possibility that it was the ordinances that are done in the temples today.
But there is nothing pointing to that. Thank you.