As one poster mentioned Christ does mention what exactly went on in the temple in vague terms. Plus, the temple worship as stated by christ was occuring during old testament times.
I believe that you could have answered your own question about the general silence of temple worship in the lds temple and the lack of mention of it in the book of mormon.
Did you listen to the mormonstories interview with greg kearney?
They Know
Ancient Samaritan Passover Ceremony Pt I, w/Ron Cantrell
youtube.com/watch?v=HWefPAMv1c8
Samaritan Pentateuch - On the return from the Exile, the Jews refused the Samaritans participation with them in the worship at Jerusalem, and the latter separated from all fellowship with them, and built a temple for themselves on Mount Gerizim. This temple was razed to the ground more than one hundred years B.C. Then a system of worship was instituted similar to that of the temple at Jerusalem. It was founded on the Law, copies of which had been multiplied in Israel as well as in Judah. Thus the Pentateuch was preserved among the Samaritans, although they never called it by this name, but always “the Law,” which they read as one book. The division into five books, as we now have it, however, was adopted by the Samaritans, as it was by the Jews, in all their priests’ copies of “the Law,” for the sake of convenience. This was the only portion of the Old Testament which was accepted by the Samaritans as of divine authority.
The form of the letters in the manuscript copies of the Samaritan Pentateuch is different from that of the Hebrew copies, and is probably the same as that which was in general use before the Captivity. There are other peculiarities in the writing which need not here be specified.
There are important differences between the Hebrew and the Samaritan copies of the Pentateuch in the readings of many sentences. In about two thousand instances in which the Samaritan and the Jewish texts differ, the LXX. agrees with the former. The New Testament also, when quoting from the Old Testament, agrees as a rule with the Samaritan text, where that differs from the Jewish. Thus Ex. 12:40 in the Samaritan reads, “Now the sojourning of the children of Israel and of their fathers which they had dwelt in the land of Canaan and in Egypt was four hundred and thirty years” (comp. Gal. 3:17). It may be noted that the LXX. has the same reading of this text
htmlbible.com/kjv30/easton/east3203.htm
Samaritans. While not frequently cited in New Testament texts, the Samaritans are a good example of division amongst the Jews of Jesus’ era. The parable of the “Good” Samaritan is often seen as highlighting the prejudice of the time which held that Samaritans were inherently “bad,” or at least inferior to the supposedly purer Jews of Judea.
Samaritans are the descendants of Jews (from the northern kingdom of Israel) who had been captured by the Assyrians in (722 BCE). For many, this biological factor alone was sufficient to make Samaritans less pure in the eyes of their fellow Jews. There were, however, religious disputes which intensified the rejection of Samaritans by Jews of the southern kingdom, Judea. The Samaritans did not acknowledge the preeminence of the Temple of Jerusalem, believing instead that the Scriptures proclaimed Mount Gerizim as God’s chosen place (the site of His covenant with Abraham, where Abraham brought his son to be sacrificed), and building their own temple there around the fourth century BCE. Additionally, they believed only in the Written Torah (Pentateuch), every word of which they believed to have been written by Moses himself, whom they revered even more than the Judeans did. This rejection of the Oral Tradition likened them to the Sadducees, but unlike the Sadducees, the Samaritans also believed in an afterlife. These religious differences put them at odds with most other groups of Jews, and combined with their mixed heritage, resulted in their portrayal as an inherently lower order of Jew.
academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/history/dfg/jesu/topic2.htm
So I went on-line and researched what exactly happens during a ceremony and every site I went to said they still do the “slit throat” thing and the “handshake” thing, and that they had to promise never to tell anyone who is not in good standing w/ their church anything at all pertaining to their temple business. Of course everything I read was written by ex-mormons, but they didn’t seem hostile about it, just matter-of-fact.
I had to argue, yeah–but you still got severely injured, so they didn’t really protect you much, did they? They think if they hadn’t been wearing them at all, they both would have been dead for sure.
