Stokes Sounds Off: List of cities that may soon get a temple

Search This Blog

Leaderboard

Wednesday, June 15, 2016

List of cities that may soon get a temple

Here is a list of cities that may soon get a temple based on research I have done and data on the LDS Church Temples website and the LDS Church Growth Blog.

1.      New Dehli India (proposed in 1992 by Elder Neal A. Maxwell)
2.      Vilnius Lithuania Temple (proposed in 1993 by Elder M. Russell Ballard)
3.      Nairobi Kenya Temple (proposed in 1998 by President Gordon B. Hinckley)
4.      Maracaibo Venezuela Temple (proposed in 1999 by President Gordon B. Hinckley)
5.      Singapore Temple (proposed in 2000 by President Gordon B. Hinckley)
6.      Southwest Salt Lake Valley Temple (proposed in 2005 by President Gordon B. Hinckley)
7.      Managua Nicaragua Temple (proposed in 2012 by Elder Russell M. Nelson)
8.      Kasai Region Democratic Republic of the Congo (proposed in 2016 by Elder Neil L. Andersen)
9.     Lehi Utah
10.  Layton Utah
11.   Orem Utah
12.   Taylorsville Utah
13.   Sandy Utah
14.   Tooele Utah
15.  Bentonville Arkansas (Acccording to my team leader at work, who served his mission there, a temple lot has already been purchased and an announcement of that temple seems to be imminent)
16.  Virginia (Richmond or Buena Vista)
17.   Kansas (Wichita or Topeka)
18.   Sierra Leone (Freetown; may be announced due to extreme Church growth in Africa)
19    Uganda (Kampala; may be announced due to extreme growth in Africa)
20.     Cambodia (Phnom Penh)
21.     Wyoming (Cheyenne or Evanston)
22.     South Dakota (Rapid City; a favored location for me since my dad served his mission there)
23. Bolivia (Santa Cruz or La Paz. Of the two, I favor La Paz, because my favorite bishop served his mission there. At the end of each missionary's service, he gave each missionary their plaque and a Bolivia abrasso)
24.  Arizona (Safford or Thatcher)
25.  Texas (Katy or Austin)
26.  Nigeria (Lagos or Benin City; is likely due to growth in Africa)
27.  Idaho (Pocatello)
28.  Philippines (Quezon City)
29. England (Birmingham)
30. Spain (Barcelona or Malaga)
31.  California (San Bernardino)
32.  Guatemala (Guatemala City; 2nd temple)
33.  Mexico (Mexico City; 2nd temple)
34.  Chile (Santiago; 2nd temple)
35. Argentina (Buenos Aires; 2nd temple)


Thoughts?

15 comments:

  1. You have Lithuania listed twice. I might be one of the few people who think this, but the Oquirrh Mountain Temple is in Southwest Salt Lake Valley. I grew up in the Salt Lake Valley. I do not think there will a temple built in Virginia. I am living a the Washington, D.C. metro area and I have not seen a full session yet. Other temples I have seen full sessions. When the Philadelphia Temple is dedicated, D.C. will lose a quarter of the district. Church leaders in D.C. are looking for more temple workers to fill the void. This issue could potential knock off other locations off your list. The list is vague (Kansas, Wyoming, instead of Topeka, KS and Cody or Gillette, WY). I would love to see a temple in a number of places listed, especially Bentonville, AR.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Southwest Salt Lake Valley is a second site that the Deseret News mapped in an article after the announcement of what would become Oquirrh Mountain was made. It is a site on 48th West, near roughly 140th South. That's about six or seven miles from the Oquirrh Mountain temple, and growth is expected in that area.

    In fact, just after the announcement was made, a developer wanted to develop land across the street as that was the city line between Herriman and Bluffdale at the time (some had proposed the 2nd southwest temple to be placed there), but the city refused to rezone for denser housing, so the developer asked to move the area involved from Bluffdale to Herriman. Herriman initially refused so he sued and won.

    New Jersey is unlikely, because it's only a couple hours at most from the furthest point in the state to either NYC or Philadelphia. It would take a lot more members being in the area for a temple in the state.

    I've heard Cody for decades, but like the current Star Valley temple, it would need to come about if enough members from areas around it were there, which is not really the case. Someone mentioned Gillette, there's one stake there, and that stake covers basically the I-90 corridor through Wyoming, plus Newcastle and one other location. Very little growth happens there, and Gillette itself is subject to oil industry boom/bust cycles.

    Rapid City would be most likely for SD, mission center, close to Gillette stake and there's a stake there. A couple mission districts also are nearby. Not much growth though in the region. when I was there in the 1980s the mission only had on average about five baptisms a month.

    Arizona. Taht one was built between Safford and Thatcher, right on US-70. After Tucson, which had been rumored for decades, and which is being built right in the target area everyone had it, at the west end of the road that everyone thought it would be built close to even ahich was rumored as early as 1982 even. Nine stakes were what we were told we would need, and it was announced whem there were eight, and two more have been formed since.

    Houston has 80k members according to KUHF 88.7 in a story that involved the Church, and most of the growth is west. The present temple is between Beltway 8 and Grand Parkway (SH-99 toll), so a temple more toward and probably even southwest of the city between the same roads would be likely, maybe even Fort Bend County, probably south of I-10/FM-1093 and maybe close to I-69 (US-59 is being renamed that).

    Austin is a Texas possibliity but not quite yet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cody Wyoming is a good place for a temple but the poldom is that if you take Cody stake out of Billings then there wount be enough members going to the temple.
      But with talke that the stack may be split soon I don't know how that will impact the changes of a temple for that area.

      Delete
    2. Cody Wyoming is a good place for a temple but the poldom is that if you take Cody stake out of Billings then there wount be enough members going to the temple.
      But with talke that the stack may be split soon I don't know how that will impact the changes of a temple for that area.

      Delete
    3. I stand corrected. My memory did not serve me right. I thought Oquirrh Mountain and Southwest Salt Lake Valley were announced at different times. Thanks for the reminder!

      Delete
  3. Goof on Bluffdale/Herriman area story, It was Bluffdale, not Herriman, that the developer sued, he got his wish and that land across from the Deseret News-reported site is now in Herriman.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think India's first temple should/will be in the south because that's where most of its membership is concentrated. Even then, it would be hundreds of miles away from most of them no matter which city it was in. Building the first one in New Delhi just because it's the capital, when that entire half (approximately) of the country has only one district and a couple of mission branches, seems highly unfair to the majority of members. It would be about as far away from them as it could possibly be while still within the country.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Elder Bednar I believe it was back in 2014 talked about how a temple in Missoule Montana could be in the next few years.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Elder Bednar I believe it was back in 2014 talked about how a temple in Missoule Montana could be in the next few years.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks to you all for your comments and feedback. I have enjoyed following the discussion here. I really appreciate what has been said. I may take the time to revise my list in the future, but for now, I think I will leave it as it is. I have no first-hand knowledge to back up any of these potential temples other than what I know about Church growth from my observation. I did wonder, what do you guys think of the cities I listed that may get a second temple? The temple districts in each of those cities is large enough that a second temple in any or all of them may take place. The Utah choices are pure guesswork on my part. I did base my temple predictions more on capital cities, which may or may not be a reality. I will be doing an updated post in just a few minutes on temples getting a new president this year, as an additional 7 have been called. Stay tuned for that. In the meantime, thanks again for the feedback.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Have updated the list with additions and corrections based on comments here and a refinement search for potential temple locations. Please see the updated list above to see what I've changed. I have looked at Church growth reported and fine-tuned my list based on what I found. This also involved the elimination of some temples because Church growth didn't warrant a temple. I also added a couple of 2nd temples for other world cities. I would appreciate and welcome any additional feedback.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I like a good number of your selections. I think we will start seeing temples in places that we would not have expected a few years ago. I have seen multiple people else where mention Layton, Tooele, Richmond, Bentonville, Lehi, so there could be something to that. Birmingham, England is an interesting selection, right in between Preston and London. What about a temple in Scotland to serve the Irish and Scots? Most importantly, we will see temples built in areas when the people and the Lord are ready for them to built. Like the list. Arizona has had a few new temples, so another one is definitely a possibility. I could see more temples being built in Africa and Asia soon.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thanks for the feedback, Nathanial! I agree. By the way, a note on Scotland and Ireland. My mother has family members there and affirms that they are far from ready for a temple because the Latter-day presence there is not what it needs to be and because the Irish and Scots are so hardhearted. So it will be interesting to see what happens there. By the way, love the name. My wife and I drew up a list of our favorite names in preparation for our future family, and your first name was on that list, with the Biblical spelling. Thanks for the comment. I think I have fixed the issues I was having with indentation on this list. It also wouldn't surprise me to have 2nd temple announced for the cities indicated above. I have crunched the numbers, and between what I found there, President Monson's April announcement of a second temple in Lima Peru (which we now know is going to be the Lima Peru Los Olivos Temple) makes a second temple for other major world cities a definite possibility.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Because of continuning formatting issues on this list, and in light of new information now available, I have redone this list. You can find the more current one at the address below, and I would prefer it if further discussion takes place at that new post. Thanks, and enjoy!
    http://stokessoundsoff.blogspot.com/2016/06/redone-list-of-cities-that-are-most.html

    ReplyDelete

In addition to my life-long love for the subjects which I cover in the posts of this blog, I have long held the belief that we can disagree without becoming disagreeable. Differences of opinion are natural, while being disagreeable in expressing those differences is not. And in that sense, I have no desire to close the door on anyone who earnestly desires to contribute to the ongoing dialogue on subjects covered in the posts on this blog.

At the same time, however, I recognize that we live in a time when incivility, discourtesy, unkindness, and even cyber-bullying has regrettably become part of online interactions. With that in mind, while anyone who wishes can comment on anything if they choose to do so, I hereby reserve the right to immediately delete any comments which are critical, unkind, lack civility, or promote prodcuts, services, and values contrary to either the Church, or to the rules of online etiquette.

I'd also like to remind all who comment here that I try to respond personally to each individual comment as I feel is appropriate. Such replies are not meant to end the conversation, but to acknowledge earnest feedback as it is submitted.

And in order to better preserve the spirit and pure intentions for which this blog was established, I also hereby request that anyone not commenting with a regular user name (particularly those whose comments appear under the "Unknown" or "Anonymous" monikers, give the rest of us a name to work with in addressing any replies. If such individuals do not wish to disclose their actual given names, a pseudonym or nickname would suffice.

Any comments made by individuals who opt to not give a name by which they can ber identified may, depending on the substance and tone of such comments, be subject to deletion as well. I would respectfully ask that all of us do all we can to keep the dialogue positive, polite, and without malice or ill-will. May the Lord bless us all in our discussion of these important matters.