Hello. This is, as noted, my second post about General Conference news. 5 temples were announced during President Monson's brief remarks in the Sunday Morning Session, for the following locations: BrasÃlia, Brazil; the greater Manila Philippines area; Nairobi, Kenya; Pocatello, Idaho; and Saratoga Springs,
Utah.
I was amazed by these announcements. Brasilia Brazil, though I had not officially listed it on my predictions, was the temple I had felt would be announced next in Brazil. And since I had indicated that it would be the next Brazilian Temple, I feel I can get credit for partially having that right. I also had the Philippines listed as a possibility, but I had the wrong city, Davao instead of the second temple that was announced for Manila. I correctly identified Nairobi Kenya and Pocatello Idaho to the exact location. And though I felt convinced that the next Utah County Temple would be in Lehi, I have never been more happy to be proven wrong. Saratoga Springs will be more centrally located than would one for Lehi, though, as I understand it, the temple district will include Lehi, Eagle Mountain, and Saratoga Springs.
But that is only half of the great news in terms of temple developments that happened as a result of this conference. While not officially confirmed at the general Church level, potential and probable sites have been identified for Brasilia Brazil (according to local priesthood leaders, it will be in the northern part of the city); for the greater Manila Philippines area (the Church’s Philippines Facebook page has identified the site for this temple as being located on the southern side of the Manila metropolitan area in the area known as Alabang,
Muntinlupa City); for the Pocatello Idaho site (of several locations, the most probable one would seem to be a 10-acre land parcel
that neighbors the meetinghouse on which the Pocatello Idaho Highland Stake Center sits); and for even the Saratoga Springs Utah Temple (the Church owns several acres of land in the community, and that one of them could be used as the temple site). Again, all of this is not official until the Church makes it so. But to have a probable site for four out of the five temples that were announced just two days ago has me convinced that official confirmations of those sites will take place shortly, opening the possibility that subsequent groundbreakings will happen sooner rather than later.
In additional temple news, reservations for the Idaho Falls Idaho Temple open house became available yesterday. And with the news of these new temples and how much closer they appear to be to a groundbreaking than the others that have previously been announced, I have once again taken the opportunity to update my temple construction progress report, and am in the middle of a major revision of my estimates for when future temple-related events might be announced and scheduled to take place. I will post that revised estimate once I am finished with it. For now, this is my update on temple developments. I will post again in a minute with my third update, a temple construction progress report, and will follow that up with two others: one that takes a look at Church leadership changes and the statistical report, and one about how my overall predictions for this conference panned out. Stay tuned, and thanks.
Tuesday, April 4, 2017
Second General Conference News Post: Temple Developments in the last 4 days
I have had a lifelong love for Church history, which has extended to ongoing reports of the ministry of our apostles and prophets, General Conference, and all temple developments. This blog enables me to share that love with all who read my thoughts on these developments, which are sometimes reported multiple times per day as needed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
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.