So, the thing about Talmage is this. The man is an incredible scholar. He’s a well-versed theologian. He expresses himself extremely well – probably the closest thing to C.S. Lewis the Mormon church has to offer (at least that I’ve found.) If you want to understand a doctrine, read Talmage’s commentary on it.
The trouble is, sometime when James E. Talmage was a young man, he must have had a terrible accident involving a thesaurus. The man has no capability of using small words. If “the” wasn’t a necessary glue in the English language, he would probably shun it. For example, I might write, “There were problems in the building of the temple.” Talmage writes, “Let it not be imagined that the work was carried through without hindrance or set-back.” Some of his style can be attributed to the time-period – he was writing in the early 1900’s – but he’s pretty academic.
Having said that, The House of the Lord is good. It’s short (which is refreshing for Talmage), and it does an excellent job of explaining why temples are important to Mormons. I learned things I never knew, and I grew up in the church, attending the temple. I would recommend it to anyone familiar with Mormonism who wants to learn more about temple work.
I would not recommend it, however, to someone who’s just starting to learn about Mormons and their temples. For one thing, there’s the vocabulary issue. But the book was also written a hundred years ago. Talmage talks about each of the temples in existence at the time (there were less than ten), but since then, there have been well over a hundred new temples built.
It’s worth the read if you’re looking for an interesting, historical look at temple work, but I wouldn’t recommend it as a first in the genre. ♦