Agree with you as to the differences regarding works. No, they do not just prove faith, but that is their primary function. Have you read the fifth chapter in the JFS manual. In it he discusses faith and teaches that Faith is a word of Action, and that without action faith is dead. Maybe instead of saying that works prove faith it would be more accurate to say that works vitalize faith.

As to Elijah I find that very interesting. I actually have heard this before, though it has been a long time and I had forgotten it.
I would say that you seem to put too much emphasis on these verses as our support for the temple. While they are commonly used, they are not the only, or even the primary ones. They are simply the ones that everyone is familiar with.

If your interested, the LDS see the Mount of Transfiguration as Elijah’s visitation in the New Testament. At this time Moses also appeared, as he did in the Kirtland Temple.
We see this the prophecy of John the Baptist “The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.” (Isaiah 40: 3).

Many thanks for your comment. Please forgive the length of time that it has taken me to get back to you.

Your first point is incredibly interesting. Whilst I would never argue that faith is not a necessity within the LDS theology, the distinct difference is the works itself in relation to salvation/exaltation. In LDS theology, faith is a necessity but the works that come afterwards are also necessary and not just a a proof for salvation/exaltation. To argue that works are a proof of faith isn’t always consistent with LDS theology due to the Calvinistic nature of the argument and go against JFS’ own statements in the manual.

Your second and third points are important in understanding the key differences between LDS and Christianity. The Malachi 4 passage would be viewed by standard Christian interpretation as John the Baptist and Jesus. John the Baptist paves the way for Jesus who turns the hearts of men towards their fathers and the hearts of fathers are turned towards their children until the consequences of the day of judgement. The LDS interpretation is based, as you rightly say, on the visitation of Elijah in 1836, referred to by JFS. As ‘standard’ Christians would not accept the revelation of Elijah to Joseph Smith Jr as authentic, the LDS argument loses credence in the eyes of ‘standard’ Christians. The argument for priesthood keys would also be rendered defunct in the eyes of Christians if the Elijah revelation is not considered authentic. As so much of temple theology is built on these verses and revelations, it is unsurprising that Christians cannot accept this theology as authentic or true compared to the imagery of the New Testament which calls John the Baptist the ‘Elijah’ to the Messiah, Jesus Christ.

I hope this finds you well.

No, I would not say they were the same gospel, and I know of no one int he church who would. If they were the same there would be no need to teach each other, would there?

However, I would like to point out just a few things, as there are similarities that you seem to miss or don’t fully understand.
First
“The necessity for salvation within Christian theology is faith. Other works are unnecessary and unhelpful if they replace faith.”
To clarify, the necessity in the LDS theology is Faith. All else is unhelpful if it is used to replace faith. While other works are necessary, they are primarily necessary in that they prove and strengthen faith. Faith is the first principle, and without it no works or odinances can save us.

Second, if you read carefully in D&C 2 you will see a clear statement that Elijah would reveal the priesthood. Thus it is clear that this verse is speaking of some power and authority from God given to man, as that is what the Priesthood is. So, while you are right that there is no explicit reference to the temples, there is an explicit reference to a holy power without which the entire earth would be wasted. Considering many other passages of scriptures, and more especially JFS’s reference to the visitation of Elijah in 1836, the passage clearly refers to some kind of priesthood keys.

Lastly, I would ask you if a standard Christian interpretation of Malachi 4 can explain the coming of Elijah. You have explained what the promises are, and how the hearts are turned, but not the actual event that was to be the catalist for this; the coming of Elijah. So, when and where did he appear.