Adam and Eve politely accepting the new ‘Temple Garments,’ while
silently wondering what happened to the promised leather upgrade.
Adam: “So these are the famous fig leaves upgrade?”
Jesus: “Technically, yes. Also, they’re flame-retardant and have Masonic vibes.”
Adam: “We’d like to speak to the manager.”
A Comparative Analysis of
Baptism and Temple Garments
A Comparative Theological Analysis:
“Are Mormons Christian?” Series
A Scholarly Examination from a Biblical and Creedal Perspective
Introduction
The relationship between divine grace, human response, and sacramental ordinances stands at the heart of Christian soteriology. Few doctrinal loci reveal the distinctive character of Latter-day Saint theology more clearly than its understanding of ordinances—particularly baptism and temple garments—as essential mechanisms within what the LDS tradition calls the “covenant path.” This article offers a comparative theological analysis of LDS teachings on baptismal necessity and sacred undergarments alongside historic Christian orthodoxy, examining how divergent doctrines of revelation, Scripture, and grace produce fundamentally different understandings of how God’s saving work reaches His people.
The theological importance of this comparison cannot be overstated. While the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints shares certain surface-level practices with historic Christianity—water baptism, sacred clothing for worship, covenantal language—the underlying theological frameworks diverge significantly. For LDS believers, baptism by immersion under proper priesthood authority is not merely a sign of grace received but a necessary condition for entrance into the celestial kingdom. Similarly, temple garments function not simply as symbolic reminders but as covenantal protections tied to one’s eternal standing before God. These teachings arise from the LDS doctrine of continuing revelation through living prophets and additional scripture, creating a soteriology of required ordinances that differs markedly from the Reformation’s emphasis on justification by faith alone and the sufficiency of Christ’s finished work.
This study engages directly with LDS canonical sources (the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price), authoritative statements from LDS prophets and apostles, and official Church publications. It places these in dialogue with the Protestant and catholic (small-c) Christian commitment to biblical sufficiency, the witness of the Church Fathers, historic creeds, and major Reformation theologians. The goal is neither polemical dismissal nor uncritical acceptance but rather an irenic yet candid examination that acknowledges the internal coherence of LDS covenantal practice while clarifying its departure from biblical and creedal orthodoxy.
Latter-day Saint Theology of Baptism and Temple Garments
Baptism as a Saving Ordinance
The fourth Article of Faith of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints declares that “baptism by immersion for the remission of sins” is one of the “first principles and ordinances of the Gospel.” Official LDS teaching holds that water baptism by proper priesthood authority is not merely important but essential for entering the celestial kingdom. The Church’s Gospel Topics study guide states unequivocally: “Baptism by immersion in water by one having authority is the first priesthood ordinance of salvation and exaltation. Baptism is necessary for an individual to become a member of the Church of Jesus Christ and to enter the celestial kingdom.”
This teaching finds its scriptural basis in LDS canon. Doctrine and Covenants 76:51–52 identifies those who inherit celestial glory as those who “received the testimony of Jesus, and believed on his name and were baptized after the manner of his burial.” The Book of Mormon reinforces this requirement: Nephi teaches that baptism is “the gate by which ye should enter” and that “then are ye in this strait and narrow path which leads to eternal life.” (2 Nephi 31:17–18). Jesus’s teaching to Nicodemus that one must be “born of water and of the Spirit” to “enter into the kingdom of God” (John 3:5) is interpreted in LDS theology as an absolute requirement for celestial glory.
A careful examination of the context in John’s gospel reveals a different interpretation. In the preceding verses, Nicodemus himself had already introduced the concept of natural birth when he asked incredulously, “Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb?” (John 3:4). Jesus’s reference to being “born of water” thus appears to allude to Nicodemus’s own statement about physical birth, with “water” referring to the amniotic fluid surrounding a baby in the womb. Yet an even stronger interpretation, one that best fits both this passage and the broader biblical witness, sees “born of water and the Spirit” as describing different aspects of the same spiritual birth—what it means to be “born from above” or “born again.”
Throughout Scripture, water is frequently used figuratively for spiritual cleansing and renewal. The Old Testament employs this imagery in Psalm 51:2, 7 (“Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity… purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean”) and Ezekiel 36:25 (“I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean”). The New Testament continues this pattern in passages such as John 13:101Jesus said to him, “The one who has bathed does not need to wash, except for his feet, but is completely clean. And you[b] are clean, but not every one of you.”; John 15:32Already you are clean because of the word that I have spoken to you.; 1 Corinthians 6:113And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.; and Hebrews 10:224let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water., where water symbolizes the spiritual cleansing brought by the Holy Spirit through God’s Word at the moment of salvation. This interpretation finds its clearest expression in Titus 3:5, which speaks of salvation “by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit,” and Ephesians 5:26, which describes Christ cleansing the church “by the washing of water with the word.” Thus, when Jesus told Nicodemus he must be “born of water and the Spirit,” He was not prescribing a ritual prerequisite but describing the spiritual regeneration that the Holy Spirit accomplishes—a reality to which baptism points but which baptism itself does not produce.
What distinguishes LDS baptismal theology from certain Christian traditions that also emphasize baptismal importance is its placement within a comprehensive system of “saving ordinances.” Baptism serves as the entrance gate to what President Russell M. Nelson and other Church leaders call the “covenant path”—a series of covenants and ordinances, including baptism, confirmation, the temple endowment, and celestial marriage, whereby members progress toward exaltation. The official Church website explains: “Baptism is thus the entrance gate to the covenant path. The term covenant path refers to a series of covenants whereby we come closer to the Savior and deepen our relationship with Him and our Heavenly Father.”
The LDS doctrine of three degrees of glory (celestial, terrestrial, and telestial kingdoms) creates a framework in which baptism functions as the necessary condition specifically for celestial glory. As noted by the Institute for Religious Research’s analysis of LDS soteriology, “Baptism is necessary only for admission to the highest of those heavenly kingdoms.” Joseph Smith himself declared that “a man may be saved, after the judgment, in the terrestrial kingdom, or in the telestial kingdom, but he can never see the celestial kingdom” without proper baptism.
Proxy Baptism for the Dead
Perhaps the most distinctive element of LDS baptismal theology is vicarious baptism for the deceased. The official Church publication on proxy baptism explains: “In the temple, we can be baptized and confirmed for those who have died without that opportunity. In other words, we can represent them and act in their place.” This practice addresses the soteriological problem created by making baptism necessary: What about the countless billions who died without receiving LDS baptism? The doctrine teaches that “death is not the end of life” and that those in the spirit world “are taught about the Savior and the plan of salvation” and “can then choose to accept the gospel and repent.” However, “they can’t be baptized there because they don’t have their physical bodies.”
The LDS Church appeals to 1 Corinthians 15:29 (“Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?”) as scriptural support for this practice. The doctrine holds that proxy ordinances become effective when “the deceased beneficiary accepts the gospel while in the spirit world awaiting resurrection.” This creates a system where baptism remains necessary but can be received vicariously, with the deceased person’s agency preserved through their choice to accept or reject the ordinance performed on their behalf.
Temple Garments: Sacred Clothing and Covenantal Protection
Beyond baptism, LDS theology includes a unique practice with no direct parallel in historic Christianity: the wearing of sacred undergarments by endowed temple members. The official Church FAQ on temple garments explains: “Faithful adult Latter-day Saints who have received their temple endowment wear a garment under their everyday clothing that has deep religious significance. The simple underclothing is usually referred to as the ‘temple garment’ or the ‘garment of the holy priesthood.’”
Origin of Temple Garments
Who Initiated: Joseph Smith introduced temple garments.
When: Temple garments were developed by Joseph Smith, probably in 1842. More specifically, Willard Richards was in the meeting with Joseph Smith and some other members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and members of the first presidency on May 4, 1842, in Nauvoo. At this meeting, Richards recorded that Smith gave the first introduction to the temple ceremony. Although the records do not explicitly talk about the temple garment, other sources agree that this was the first occasion that temple garments were introduced.
Purpose: According to LDS teaching, the temple garments serve several purposes. First, the garment provides the member “a constant reminder” of the covenants they made in the temple. Second, the garment “when properly worn … protects against temptation and evil.” Wearing the garment is also “an outward expression of an inward commitment” to follow Jesus Christ.
Original Design: According to two accounts, the original temple garment was made of unbleached muslin with markings bound in turkey red, fashioned by Nauvoo seamstress Elizabeth Warren Allred under Joseph Smith’s direction. Joseph’s reported intention was to have a one-piece garment covering the arms, legs, and torso, having “as few seams as possible.”
The original garment had four marks that were snipped into the cloth as part of the original Nauvoo endowment ceremony. These marks were a reverse-L-shaped symbol on the right breast, a V-shaped symbol on the left breast, and horizontal marks at the navel and over the right knee.
Masonic Connection: The timing is notable—Joseph was initiated as an Entered Apprentice Mason on March 15, 1842, and received the Fellow Craft and master degrees the following day. He introduced the full endowment ceremony, which included the secret signs, tokens, passwords, and penalties, just seven weeks later, on May 4, 1842.
This historical detail about the roughly seven-week gap between Joseph Smith becoming a Freemason and introducing temple garments (with their square and compass markings) is a valuable historical marker, as it provides important context for understanding the origins of this distinctive LDS practice.
The garment is white, comes in two pieces (top and bottom), and contains specific symbolic markings. President Russell M. Nelson has taught that “faithfully wearing the temple garment” represents “a continuing commitment” and that “we wear the garment faithfully as part of the enduring armor of God.” The First Presidency has stated that “the garment of the holy priesthood reminds us of the veil in the temple, and that veil is symbolic of Jesus Christ. When you put on your garment, you put on a sacred symbol of Jesus Christ.”
Critically, LDS teaching ascribes protective functions to the garment. The official Church FAQ states: “When worn properly throughout life, it also serves as a protection against temptation and evil.” President Spencer W. Kimball expressed his conviction that “there could be and undoubtedly have been many cases where there has been, through faith, an actual physical protection.” The Church’s Handbook 2 affirms that when “properly worn, it protects against temptation and evil.” Elder Carlos E. Asay described the garment as “a protective covering for the body” that “strengthens the wearer to resist temptation, fend off evil influences, and stand firmly for the right.”
Wearing the garment is not merely recommended but covenantally required. The official FAQ notes that “during the initial part of the endowment, members are authorized to wear the temple garment and covenant to wear it throughout their lives.” Temple recommend interviews include the question: “Do you honor your sacred privilege to wear the garment as instructed in the initiatory ordinances?” The General Handbook instructs that members “should wear the garment day and night throughout your life” and “should not modify or alter the garment to accommodate different styles of clothing.”
The LDS Church connects temple garments to biblical precedent, particularly the priestly garments of Exodus 28. The official FAQ states: “In biblical times, priests who served in the temple also wore special religious underclothing. The undergarment served as spiritual protection and was provided when a priest was anointed to serve in the temple.” This appeal to Levitical precedent, however, raises significant hermeneutical questions that will be addressed in the comparative analysis below.
Historic Christian Teaching on Sacraments and External Signs
Baptism in Biblical and Creedal Christianity
Historic Christianity across its major traditions—Reformed, Lutheran, Catholic, Orthodox, and Baptist—practices and values baptism as divinely commanded. However, the theological understanding of baptism’s relationship to salvation differs markedly from LDS teaching. While Christian traditions vary in their views of baptismal efficacy, timing, and mode, they unite in affirming that salvation is fundamentally by grace through faith, not by the accumulation of ordinances.
The Apostle Paul’s teaching in Ephesians 2:8–9 stands as a foundational text: “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” (ESV). This passage, along with Paul’s extended argument in Romans 3–4, establishes that justification comes through faith apart from works of law. The Reformation’s emphasis on sola fide (faith alone) and sola gratia (grace alone) crystallized this biblical teaching against any system that makes salvation contingent upon human performance of required ordinances.
Within this framework, Christian traditions understand baptism as a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, not as the mechanism of salvation itself. The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) represents the Reformed position: baptism is “a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life.” Yet the Confession also affirms that “grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated or saved without it.”
Lutheran theology, while holding a higher view of baptismal efficacy, still grounds salvation in grace received through faith. The Augsburg Confession (1530) teaches that baptism is “necessary to salvation” and that “through Baptism is offered the grace of God.” However, this grace is received through faith, and the sacrament’s efficacy is not magical or mechanical but tied to the Word of promise. The Lutheran understanding differs from LDS teaching in that baptism is not a prerequisite for entrance into a higher tier of heaven but rather the ordinary means by which God’s saving grace in Christ is applied to sinners.
Baptist and evangelical traditions emphasize believers’ baptism as an act of obedience and public profession following conversion, rather than as a saving ordinance. Baptism demonstrates the spiritual reality that has already occurred through faith. As one evangelical resource explains, baptism is “a sign and seal of covenant relationship, not the mechanism of salvation.” The Didache, one of the earliest Christian documents outside the New Testament, treats baptism as important while recognizing exceptions: “If you have neither, pour water on the head three times in the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit.”
The Thief on the Cross: A Test Case for Faith and Salvation
The account of the penitent thief in Luke 23:39–43539 One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him,[a] saying, “Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!” 40 But the other rebuked him, saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” 42 And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” 43 And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.” provides a crucial test case for understanding the relationship between faith and baptism. As Christ hung on the cross between two criminals, one “railed on him” while the other rebuked his companion and turned to Jesus: “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” Jesus responded: “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.” (ESV).
This exchange demonstrates several critical soteriological truths. First, the thief exhibited genuine faith: he acknowledged his own guilt (“We are receiving the due reward of our deeds”), confessed Jesus’ innocence, and trusted in Christ’s kingdom authority. Second, Jesus pronounced immediate salvation without any intervening ordinance: “Today you will be with me in paradise.” Third, the thief had no opportunity for baptism or any other ritual performance. As one biblical scholar notes, “The thief on the cross gives us an illustration of saving faith apart from baptism, and that is instructive to us as we seek to understand this mystery of salvation.”
Some who argue for baptismal necessity suggest the thief may have been previously baptized by John or that he died under the Old Covenant before Christian baptism was instituted. While these arguments have some historical merit—the New Covenant was not fully ratified until Christ’s death—they concede the central point: Jesus declared someone saved based on faith without requiring baptism. The sovereign authority of Christ to forgive sins (“That you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins,” Mark 2:10) operates independently of sacramental mechanisms. The thief’s salvation demonstrates that faith, not ordinance performance, is the instrument by which God’s saving grace is received.
Sacred Clothing in Christian Tradition
Historic Christianity recognizes no prescribed undergarment for lay believers that mediates grace or spiritual protection. While liturgical vestments exist for clergy in Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, and some Lutheran traditions, these are functional and symbolic garments worn during worship services, not daily underclothing imbued with protective power. The priest’s stole, for instance, symbolizes the yoke of Christ and pastoral authority, but no Christian tradition teaches that wearing it provides spiritual or physical protection outside of liturgical functions.
The LDS appeal to Exodus 28 as a precedent for temple garments warrants careful examination. This passage describes God instructing Moses to create elaborate priestly garments for Aaron and his sons—the designated Levitical priests—to wear while serving in the tabernacle. These “holy garments for glory and for beauty” (Exodus 28:2) included the ephod, breastplate, robe, tunic, turban, sash, and linen trousers. Several observations are critical:
First, these garments were exclusively for Aaronic priests, not for all Israelites. Exodus 28:1 specifies: “Bring near to you Aaron your brother, and his sons with him, from among the people of Israel, to serve me as priests.” The linen undergarments (“linen breeches,” Exodus 28:426You shall make for them linen undergarments to cover their naked flesh. They shall reach from the hips to the thighs;) were part of this priestly attire, not everyday wear for the covenant community. Second, these garments were worn during temple service, not continuously. Leviticus 16:23–24723 “Then Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting and shall take off the linen garments that he put on when he went into the Holy Place and shall leave them there. 24 And he shall bathe his body in water in a holy place and put on his garments and come out and offer his burnt offering and the burnt offering of the people and make atonement for himself and for the people. indicates the high priest changed out of his linen garments after performing atonement rituals. Third, and most significantly, the New Testament teaches that the Levitical priesthood and its ceremonial requirements have been fulfilled and superseded in Christ. The book of Hebrews argues extensively that Jesus is “a high priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek” (Hebrews 6:20), whose perfect sacrifice “has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified” (Hebrews 10:14).
First Peter 2:9 applies priestly language to all believers: “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession.” This universal priesthood of believers, however, is spiritual and covenantal, not liturgical or vestimentary. Nowhere does the New Testament prescribe special clothing for this royal priesthood. The “whole armor of God” in Ephesians 6:10–18 is explicitly metaphorical: truth, righteousness, the gospel of peace, faith, salvation, the word of God, and prayer—not physical garments.
Comparative Analysis
Doctrinal Foundations: Scripture vs. Continuing Revelation
The fundamental divergence between LDS and historic Christian teaching on ordinances stems from radically different doctrines of revelation and scriptural authority. Protestant Christianity affirms sola Scriptura—the Bible as the sole infallible rule of faith and practice. The Catholic and Orthodox traditions, while recognizing the authority of sacred Tradition alongside Scripture, hold that the deposit of faith was completed with the apostolic age. The LDS Church, by contrast, teaches that God continues to reveal new doctrine through living prophets, with additional canonical scriptures (Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price) and ongoing prophetic pronouncements carrying binding authority.
This difference in revelatory framework explains how LDS teaching can introduce requirements—such as temple garments and proxy baptism for the dead—that have no precedent in the New Testament and were unknown in the historic church. From a Protestant perspective, doctrines not grounded in Scripture cannot be binding on conscience. The Westminster Confession states: “The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added.” The LDS system, operating from a different revelatory premise, feels no such constraint.
Baptism: Sign and Seal vs. Saving Mechanism
The most significant theological difference concerns the nature and purpose of baptism. In LDS theology, baptism by proper priesthood authority is a necessary condition for celestial glory—one cannot enter the highest heaven without it. This creates a soteriology in which ordinance performance becomes essential to one’s eternal destiny. The official Church teaching that baptism is “necessary for an individual … to enter the celestial kingdom” places baptism in a causative relationship to salvation.
Historic Christianity, while valuing baptism highly, understands it differently. Even traditions with high sacramental theology (Lutheran, Catholic, Orthodox) ground baptism’s efficacy in Christ’s work and the gift of faith, not in the ritual performance itself. The Catholic Catechism acknowledges that “God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments” (CCC 1257). The Reformed tradition views baptism as a sign and seal that confirms and represents the grace received through faith, not as the mechanism by which grace is obtained.
The LDS practice of proxy baptism for the dead extends this mechanistic understanding beyond mortal life. The premise is that baptism is so necessary that even the dead must receive it vicariously before they can progress to celestial glory. While LDS teaching preserves the deceased person’s agency (they must accept the proxy ordinance), the system still requires the physical performance of baptism—even if by proxy—as a condition for salvation. This stands in stark contrast to the New Testament’s teaching that “it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment” (Hebrews 9:27) and to Jesus’ parable of Lazarus and the rich man, which depicts a “great chasm” fixed between the blessed and the condemned after death (Luke 16:268And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.’).
Sacred Clothing: Garments as Protection vs. Christian Freedom
The LDS teaching on temple garments represents perhaps the sharpest departure from historic Christian practice. The claim that physical undergarments provide “protection against temptation and evil” and potentially “actual physical protection” (as President Kimball affirmed) introduces a concept foreign to biblical Christianity. The idea that a piece of cloth can function as spiritual armor through faithful wearing approaches a magical or talismanic understanding of material objects.
Historic Christianity locates spiritual protection in Christ Himself, the indwelling Holy Spirit, the Word of God, prayer, and the fellowship of the church—the ordinary means of grace. When Paul exhorts believers to “put on the whole armor of God” (Ephesians 6:11), he immediately explains that this armor consists of truth, righteousness, the gospel, faith, salvation, God’s Word, and prayer (Ephesians 6:14–18914 Stand therefore, having fastened on the belt of truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, 15 and, as shoes for your feet, having put on the readiness given by the gospel of peace. 16 In all circumstances take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming darts of the evil one; 17 and take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, 18 praying at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication. To that end, keep alert with all perseverance, making supplication for all the saints,). These are spiritual realities appropriated through faith, not physical garments worn continuously. To transform this metaphor into a literal requirement for protective underclothing is to fundamentally misread Paul’s intention.
The LDS application of Exodus 28 to modern lay members—including women, who could never serve as Levitical priests—ignores the passage’s specific historical and covenantal context. The Levitical priesthood was limited to Aaron’s male descendants; its garments were worn only during temple service; and the entire system has been fulfilled in Christ, our eternal High Priest (Hebrews 4:14-161014 Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. 15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.; 7:23-271123 The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office, 24 but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever. 25 Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost[a] those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them. 26 For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. 27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself.). The New Testament nowhere extends priestly garments to the general body of believers, and no evidence exists for such practice in the early church.
Soteriological Implications: Ordinances, Merit, and Assurance
The cumulative effect of LDS ordinance theology creates a soteriology of covenantal performance and worthiness. Entrance into the celestial kingdom requires baptism; continued good standing requires wearing garments and keeping other covenants; exaltation (the highest degree within the celestial kingdom) requires additional ordinances, including celestial marriage. The General Handbook’s statement that faithful garment-wearing provides “greater access to the Savior’s mercy, protection, strength, and power” ties spiritual benefits to ongoing performance of prescribed behaviors.
This system contrasts sharply with the Reformation’s emphasis on justification by faith alone, the sufficiency of Christ’s finished work, and the believer’s secure standing in grace. When Paul asks, “Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?” (Romans 8:35), his triumphant answer is “nothing”—not tribulation, distress, persecution, famine, nakedness, danger, or sword; not death, life, angels, rulers, things present, things to come, powers, height, depth, or “anything else in all creation” (Romans 8:35-391235 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? 36 As it is written, “For your sake we are being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.” 37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.). This assurance rests not on covenant performance but on Christ’s accomplished redemption: “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” (Romans 8:1).
In historic Christianity, the sacraments—baptism and the Lord’s Supper—serve to nurture faith, strengthen believers, and testify to the grace already received in Christ. They are means of grace, not mechanisms of merit. The believer’s assurance rests in Christ’s promise, not in the accumulation or faithful performance of ordinances. As Luther declared in his Small Catechism regarding baptism: “It is not the water that does these things, but the word of God in and with the water, and faith which trusts this word of God in the water.” The operative reality is faith, trusting Christ’s promise, not the water itself or the ritual performance.
Implications for Faith and Practice
The practical outworking of these theological differences shapes daily discipleship in profound ways. For Latter-day Saints, covenant-keeping is framed in terms of ordinance faithfulness and garment observance. The temple recommend interview’s question about garment-wearing, along with questions about tithing, word of wisdom adherence, and moral conduct, creates a system where standing before God is evaluated in relation to ordinances received and covenants kept. Elder James E. Faust reportedly told President Harold B. Lee that when considering someone’s worthiness, “how one wears the garment is the expression of how the individual feels about the Church and everything that relates to it. It is a measure of one’s worthiness and devotion to the gospel.”
This framework shapes ecclesial boundaries—who is “on the covenant path” versus those still lacking key ordinances. The progressive nature of LDS ordinances (baptism, then endowment, then celestial marriage) creates tiers of covenant status within the community. Those without temple recommends cannot attend weddings or certain ceremonies; those without garments cannot participate in temple rituals. The entire structure presupposes a tiered approach to salvation reflected in the three degrees of glory doctrine.
By contrast, historic Christian practice recognizes baptism and the Lord’s Supper as means by which the Church nurtures faith and proclaims Christ’s death until He comes (1 Corinthians 11:2613For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.). Assurance rests in Christ’s promise and the Spirit’s witness (Romans 8:1614The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,), not in the accumulation of ordinances or the faithful wearing of prescribed clothing. Paul’s teaching on Christian liberty explicitly addresses food, drink, and special days (Romans 14; Colossians 2:16-23); the same principle extends to clothing. Christians are “not under law but under grace” (Romans 6:1415 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.), and nothing—including undergarments—should be imposed as a requirement beyond the gospel itself.
The absence of temple garments or equivalent lay vestments in Christian practice reflects a different theology of embodiment, holiness, and God’s presence with His people. Christianity affirms that the believer’s body is itself “a temple of the Holy Spirit” (1 Corinthians 6:1916Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own,), not because of what clothing covers it but because of the indwelling Spirit received through faith. Holiness is a matter of heart transformation through the Spirit’s work, not external compliance with clothing requirements. The “new self” we are called to “put on” (Ephesians 4:2417and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.; Colossians 3:1018and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator.) is “created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness”—a spiritual reality, not a fabric garment.
Conclusion
This comparative analysis has demonstrated that Latter-day Saint teaching on baptism as essential for celestial glory and temple garments as covenantal protection constitutes a significant departure from biblical and creedal orthodoxy. The differences are not merely peripheral or semantic but touch the heart of soteriology: How does God’s saving work reach His people? What is the relationship between grace, faith, and ordinance? What role do material objects play in the Christian life?
LDS theology answers these questions through a framework of continuing revelation, required ordinances, and progressive covenant-keeping that shapes eternal destiny across three degrees of glory. Historic Christianity, grounded in the sufficiency of Scripture and the finality of Christ’s atoning work, understands salvation as a gift of grace received through faith, with baptism as a divinely commanded sign and seal of that grace—important, even necessary in the ordinary course, but not the ultimate ground or mechanism of salvation. The thief on the cross, saved by Jesus’ word of promise without any intervening ordinance, illustrates the priority of faith over sacramental performance.
Regarding temple garments, historic Christianity recognizes no prescribed undergarment for laypeople that mediates grace or protection. The Levitical priestly garments, far from providing precedent for modern LDS practice, were specific to the Aaronic priesthood, limited to temple service, and fulfilled in Christ, our eternal High Priest. The “armor of God” in Ephesians 6 is explicitly spiritual—truth, righteousness, faith, salvation, Scripture, prayer—not physical underclothing. Spiritual protection in the Christian life comes through Christ, the indwelling Spirit, the Word, and the ordinary means of grace, not through mandated garments.
Christians engaging with Latter-day Saints should approach such conversations with both clarity and charity. The internal coherence of LDS covenantal practice deserves acknowledgment: given its premises about continuing revelation and required ordinances, the system logically follows. However, those premises themselves constitute a different doctrine of revelation, grace, and church than that confessed by historic, creedal Christianity. The Nicene Creed’s confession of “one baptism for the remission of sins” was not understood by its framers as establishing baptism as a ticket to a higher tier of heaven or as something that could be performed vicariously for the dead.
The biblical witness points to a Savior who declares, “It is finished” (John 19:30)—whose work is complete, whose righteousness is sufficient, whose grace is free. “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Ephesians 2:8–9). This remains the good news that the Church has proclaimed for two millennia: salvation is in Christ alone, received by faith alone, through grace alone, to the glory of God alone. No addition of required ordinances or protective garments can improve upon the perfect and finished work of our great High Priest, who “always lives to make intercession” for those who draw near to God through Him (Hebrews 7:25).
Works Cited
Asay, Carlos E. “The Temple Garment: An Outward Expression of an Inward Commitment.” Ensign, August 1997.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. “About Proxy Baptism and Confirmation.” churchofjesuschrist.org. Accessed January 2026.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. “Baptism.” Gospel Topics Study Guide. churchofjesuschrist.org.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. “Frequently Asked Questions About the Temple Garment.” churchofjesuschrist.org. Accessed January 2026.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. General Handbook: Serving in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 2020.
Hales, Robert D. “The Covenant of Baptism: To Be in the Kingdom and of the Kingdom.” General Conference, October 2000.
Hawkins, Carl S. “Baptism.” In Latter-day Saint Essentials: Readings from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, edited by John W. Welch and Devan Jensen, 98–101. Provo, UT: BYU Studies and Religious Studies Center, 2002.
Kimball, Spencer W. The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball. Edited by Edward L. Kimball. Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1982.
Luther, Martin. Small Catechism. 1529.
McKeever, Bill. “Do Temple Garments Protect the Faithful Mormon?” Mormonism Research Ministry. March 11, 2014.
Nelson, Russell M. “Personal Preparation for Temple Blessings.” Ensign, May 2001.
Smith, Joseph Fielding. Doctrines of Salvation. 3 vols. Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1954–1956.
The Holy Bible. English Standard Version. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2001.
Westminster Confession of Faith. 1646.