Monday, February 27, 2017

New Stakes Created in Idaho, Montana, and Nicaragua

Idaho
The Church organized a new stake in the Idaho Falls area on February 19th. The Ammon Idaho East Stake was organized from a division of the Ammon Idaho Foothills Stake and the Iona Idaho South Stake. The new stake includes the following seven wards: the Ammon 12th, Ammon 17th, Ammon 22nd, Ammon 29th, Ammon 32nd, Iona 4th, and Iona 8th Wards.

There are now 129 stakes in Idaho.

Montana
The Church organized a new stake in Montana for the first time in 20 years. The Frenchtown Montana Stake was organized on February 26th from a division of the Kalispell Montana Stake and Missoula Montana Stake. The new stake includes the following five wards and three branches: the Frenchtown, Missoula 4th, Polson, Ronan, and St Ignatius Wards, and the Plains, Superior, and Thompson Falls Branches.

There are now 12 stakes in Montana.

Nicaragua
A new stake was organized in Nicaragua on January 22nd. The Matagalpa Nicaragua Stake was organized from the Matagalpa Nicaragua District. The new stake includes the following four ward and three branches: the Guanuca, Jinotega, Matagalpa, and Totolate Wards, and the La Dalia, San Ramon, and Yaguare Branches. It is likely that one or more additional branches have advanced into wards since the organization of the new stake. Nicaragua is currently the country with the most stakes and members without a temple announced, under construction, or in operation. A temple announcement for Managua, Nicaragua appears likely within the foreseeable future. However, the Church in neighboring Honduras did not have a temple announced until there were 20 stakes in the country. Thus, it may be many more years until a temple is announced for Nicaragua, especially given that the Church in Nicaragua exhibits some of the lowest member activity rates in the world

There are now 11 stakes and four districts in Nicaragua.

53 comments:

L. Chris Jones said...

My stake is adjacent those stakes in Ammon. One of the Foothills wards shares my building.

John Pack Lambert said...

What country has the next most stakes after Nicaragua without a temple?

If I am calculating correctly there are currently the same number of stakes in Ivory Coast and Nicaragua although I expect Ivory coast to take the lead this year.

John Pack Lambert said...

What country has the next most stakes after Nicaragua without a temple?

If I am calculating correctly there are currently the same number of stakes in Ivory Coast and Nicaragua although I expect Ivory coast to take the lead this year.

L. Chris Jones said...

Ivory Coast does have a temple announced

TempleRick said...

After Nicaragua, these are the countries with the most stakes without a temple.

American Samoa (5)
Puerto Rico (5)
Cape Verde (3)
India (3)
Russia (3)
Uganda (3)
Austria (2)
Belgium (2)
Cambodia (2)
Indonesia (2)
Kenya (2)
Kiribati (2)
Madagascar (2)
Marshall Islands (2)
Mongolia (2)
Mozambique (2)
Norway (2)
Papua New Guinea (2)
Republic of the Congo (2)

TempleRick said...

With districts…

American Samoa (5,0)
Puerto Rico (5,0)
Russia (3,10)
India (3,4)
Cape Verde (3,2)
Uganda (3,0)
Papua New Guinea (2,11)
Cambodia (2,5)
Kenya (2,4)
Kiribati (2,2)
Madagascar (2,2)
Indonesia (2,1)
Mongolia (2,1)
Mozambique (2,1)
Republic of Congo (2,1)
Austria (2,0)
Belgium (2,0)
Marshall Islands (2,0)
Norway (2,0)

Eric Parker said...

Not a new split, but Nevada Warm Springs stake had half the wards realign to form a new ward (Liberty Heights). Think that makes 11 wards and a Spanish branch. I am shocked the stake hasn't split yet; I don't think the stake has split in the last 20 years.

bwebster said...

I served in Nicaragua in 1973-74 towards the end of my mission. At that time, it had a single (member) district with, I believe, 6 branches in all. I ended up serving as zone leader over the entire country, first with Paul Quigley and then with Jim Thomas. The mission office was in Costa Rica, and we saw the mission president (Quinten Hunsaker) about every six weeks when he would come to visit and hold zone conference. There were probably about 300-400 active members in the entire country.

Good to remember when people question whether the Church has grown all that much over the years. :-) ..bruce..

James Anderson said...

American Samoa had a temple planned for it but it was eventuaqlly built not that far away in Samoa itself. It had a unique design, with the roof nearly rounded and in such a way all the rain would run right off and it was such that if built, you would not hear that rain. Rain is frequent and sometimes very heavy in both Samoas

Eduardo Clinch said...

Comparing growth of Idaho and Chile, back in 1991 I had debates with my Shelley Idaho companion that Chile had more members than his home state. He didn't believe me and refused to accept that Chile then had 300,000 members while Idaho had less. On paper, of course.
Chile did have 100 stakes by the end of the 90s before they retracted, and Idaho has more active membership, but in pure numbers I think Chile is still ahead.☺
But it is apparent by temple growth alone that Idaho is clearly progressing better in Gospel dynamics.
So we were both right and both wrong. Great to see 129 stakes in the Gem State.

Eduardo Serna said...

Yesterday was anounce the construction for the first church building in Silao, Guanajuato, Mexico. It will start in 3 months. Right now Silao is the biggest branch in the District.

Tom said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Tom said...

Never too early for temple predictions!

Based on today's news of the new stake in Nicaragua, I put my money on a Managua, Nicaragua temple being announced, but not until 2018. I think we will see a pause in temple announcements this year so as to focus on clearing the backlog.

miro said...

Also Scotland has 5 stakes. But you could say it's part of the UK.

James said...

I am intrigued by the information that I read in both this blog post and this comment thread. Nicaragua has been at the top of my list for a possible temple for a while now. Not only has one been publicly proposed, but I have heard from several sources that land for such a site has already been purchased, and that the announcement of such a temple will happen when Church growth and temple attendance in the area a Nicaraguan temple will serve warrants that happening. Tom, as far as I know (and I have studied the matter extensively) there has not been a "backlog" in temple construction since President Monson's announced intention to temporarily halt such announcements between 2013 and 2015. In fact, a further study of temple construction progress shows a couple of interesting facts. After the dedications later this year, we will have no temples in any phase of construction in the United States (I do not count the Jordan River Utah temple in those terms because it is a renovation, not a new temple.) And that is most irregular. The fact is, with the four dedications announced for this year, and at least six possible next year, temple progress is nowhere near as backed up as it was during that two year halt. So it would surprise me very much if there were no new temple announcements this year. There is always a possibility that you could be right, but here's some additional information: except for the Urdaneta Philippines Temple, announced 7 years ago this October, the only other temples that have not had a groundbreaking announced are those 7 that have been announced in the last two years. So I would be interested in hearing more about why you say there is a backlog. I mean no offense. You are entitled to your own opinion, and I'm sure you have a good reason for saying there is a backlog, but I've not seen evidence of that for several years, and I have tried to follow temple construction progress daily. These are just my initial thoughts about that. Anyone can feel free to disagree with me. I flatter myself that I know quite a bit about current temple construction developments, but I will admit that I don't know everything. If I have missed or overlooked something, please let me know. That said, I love the other insights shared here. Thanks to you all for adding to my understanding of Church growth developments.

TempleRick said...

Scotland's exit from the UK is certainly a growing possibility.

James Anderson said...

'Rwanda's first missionary', from the Africa Southeast Area site.

http://africase.lds.org/rwandas-first-missionary

Bryan Dorman said...

This Week in Mormons also posted an article of two South Sudanese missionaries, also linking to Africa SE Area.

About the temples, I am going to do something very differently here. I am going to put down my 23 picks from 178 to 200 based off of the current factors the Church is looking at, plus some gut instincts that I have on this matter.

I am also assigning a number from 0-10. A 0 means there is virtually no chance that the temple is called in the upcoming conference, but could get called after 5 years. A 10 means an almost absolute chance that the temple is called in the upcoming conference. If the number is 7 to 9, then there is a pretty good chance it will be called within two years if not at the same conference. If the number is 4-6 then there is a good chance that it gets called from 2-4 years (though it would be a surprise if the temple is called in the upcoming conference). A 1-3 means a small chance of it being called before 5 years and a good chance after 5-8 years.

So here goes.

178. Managua Nicaragua (9)
179. NW Mexico (I am thinking either Torreon, Culiacan, or even Durango as a dark horse here to eliminate the need for Culiacan or Torreon as it is in the middle): 7.5
180. Queretaro Mexico (6.5)
181. Puebla Mexico (6.5)
182. Salvador Brazil (5.5)
183. Nairobi Kenya (OR Kampala Uganda) (5.5)
184. NW Arkansas (5.0)
185. No. Davis County (4.5)
186. No. Utah County (4.5)
187. Antofagasta Chile (3.5)
188. Salta Argentina (3.5)
189. So. Argentina (3.0)
190. Sao Paulo II (2.5)
191. Las Vegas II (2.5)
192. Ullanbattar Mongolia (2.5)
193. Taiwan II (2.0)
194. Korea II (2.0)
195. Moscow Russia (1.5)
196. Praia Cabo Verde (1.5)
197. Freetown Sierra Leone (1.0)
198. San Juan PR (1.0)
199. Budapest Hungary (1.0)
200. New Delhi India (0.5)

Other surprises might include: Mindanao Phillipines (0.5), Pago Pago Samoa (0.5), Oslo Norway (<0.5), Dubai UAE (<0.5), Jerusalem (<0.1), 5 Egyptian Temples (<0.1)

L. Chris Jones said...

I would add Pocatello Idaho somewhere in the next five years or so.

L. Chris Jones said...

Plus Nigeria II and Venezuela II. Both have a lot of stakes In relation to temple size.

Bryan Dorman said...

Yeah my bad.
Lagos Nigeria.

I don't see Venezuela happening barring a change of government

Bryan Dorman said...

Lagos (7.5) Benin City (5) Abuja (2.5)

James said...

If any of you have not yet checked out or signed up to join the LDS Church Growth Forum that has been started recently, I would encourage you to do so. It is wonderful that Church growth developments can still be discussed here. But what the forum does is to allow discussions about subjects like temples to take place in greater depth there, which would hopefully free up this blog to be geared more towards comments and responses to the actual content of the post. A link to that forum was given in an earlier comment thread by the one who started the forum, but I post it now for any who may be interested in continuing the conversation more in depth there. Hope that information is helpful to you. And I will still be intrigued to hear Tom's response regarding why he believes there is still a backlog in temple announcements. The link to the forum follows. Let the discussion continue, in every place possible. Thanks.

http://ldsgrowth.proboards.com/

http://ldsgrowth.proboards.com/

Tom said...

@Bryan Dorman: awesome idea trying to plan out #'s 178-200. I don't know if I can come up with ideas all the way to 200, but I'm having fun imagining the following (I'll use your same numbering system)
Managua, Nicaragua (9)
'Lake Victoria' Temple (Somewhere sorta equidistant between Nairobi, Kenya & Kampala, Uganda) (9)
New Delhi, India (Serving Pakistan as well) (8)
Ulanbataar, Mongolia (Serving Western China & Eastern Russia as well) (8)
Moscow, Russia (5)
Ankara, Turkey (Serving Southern balkan región, Arabian peninsula, Middle East, N. Africa, & newly created Eurasia area) (5)

Eduardo Clinch said...

No Papua New Guinea or Singapore/Malaysia? Or even Indonesia?
How about another for Brazil?
I hear South Korea is down. But like Mongolia.
Something will change in China. They can't be anti-freedom forever.
India needs one, for sure.

BYULAW said...

I noticed that while the amount of stakes that have been created by this time of year is several less than last year, there are still more stake creations than most of the preceding years. I wonder if the church is taking a more aggressive approach to stake creations. In looking at stakes with the most wards, I don't see as many with 14, 15, or 16 wards like I've seen in years past. I suspect several of the stakes with 13 wards in areas like Coatzacoalcos, Abidjan, Morgan, Hurricane, and maybe Lehi will split this year. However, I wonder if the church is making a more concerted effort to keep the number of wards below 12. Is anyone aware of any official shift in policy or approach? Or, am I reading into it too much and there isn't much of a change for years past?

BYULAW said...

*from* years past (sorry should have proofread before posting)

Mike Johnson said...

The question was "country" and legally in the UK England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland are "countries". So, why not Scotland being included? While I am not convinced any country of the UK will leave the union, if one did it would probably be Northern Ireland. Scotland was rebuffed by the EU and told there was no hope for them staying in the EU unless the UK stayed.

I served my mission in Puerto Rico and back then 1981-83 there was supposedly property owned by the Church for a temple. I always thought Puerto Rico would be the first in the Caribbean to get a temple, but the DR and now Haiti showed how wrong I was. My argument was that the Church had been in PR longer and PR was under the US Constitution. Well that was a bad argument. I am intrigued by the parallel between Puerto Rico and American Samoa, each now with 5 stakes while the neighbor to the west now has 20 stakes and a temple (DR and Samoa). So much for the theory that being under the US Constitution would be an important factor in decision making. It is probably easier now for the saints in PR and AS to go to the DR and Samoa, respectively than the other way around.

What US state has more stakes, congregations, and members than Nicaragua?

Bryan Dorman said...

Tom: Agree with your assessment for Managua. I would be a bit more comfortable for Nairobi OR Kampala if there were to be a stake created in Tanzania, or a third stake in Kenya, or districts in Burundi and Rwanda. We are pretty close on all of those indicators save maybe Tanzania.

New Delhi only has a district and there are three stakes in the entire temple district (also I think six districts). PAK and IND aren't the best of friends either. It could happen, with more stakes. And more branches in the northern half of the country.

Moscow for me has a similar issue with New Delhi. Stakes are too far apart, and the districts likewise are far apart, though I do see it as a possibility if we can turn those districts surrounding Moscow into stakes. And if Samara and Rostov become stakes. Rostov is a bit closer to that than is Samara. St Pete is reasonably close to Helsinki.

Ankara will not happen anytime soon. There are only seven branches in the entire country, two of them mission branches. The Greeks would not go to the temple in Turkey; they get along with Turkey slightly better than Israel gets along with Palestine, or Pakistan with India. If any temple is to be constructed in the Middle East in the next ten years, it will probably be in the UAE. I look a little more to Budapest because there is a stake already there, and districts in the countries surrounding it, plus two stakes in neighboring Vienna and one in Prague (though Prague is VERY close to Freiberg).

James said...

I love the fact that there has been more talk here about potential temple sites. That has been one of the big items up for discussion on the LDS Church Growth Blog. While I have my own list of possibilities in the order I feel they will be announced in the future, I personally don't feel comfortable enough to assign potential numbers to these choices. This is because all the research I can do on the subject will never be enough to adequately predict 100% where the Lord will put His future temples. For me, the question is not which temples will be announced in what order, but rather the factors that are involved in making such choices. Unit and congregational growth are a couple to be sure. And while a temple being proposed by an apostle or the Church purchasing land in certain locations says nothing of how imminently likely such temples are to actually be announced and built, the four at the top of my list are ones where I know a site has been purchased and an announcement is imminent when unit and congregational growth and attendance at neighboring temples by those in the district those future temples will be built warrants it. And the nature of those reports leaves no doubt in my mind that at least four should be at the top of the list: Managua Nicaragua, Port Moresby Papua New Guinea, Bentonville Arkansas, and Missoula Montana.

I have no doubt that if any temples are announced in April, at least one will be located in the United States, if not specifically in Utah. If no new temples are announced anywhere in the United States by the end of this year, it will be the first time in Church history of which I am aware where no temples are under construction in the United States. (In making that statement, I do not feel that the renovation for the Jordan River Utah Temple "counts"; I am speaking only of new temples.)

Those are just some additional thoughts. Thanks for reading this comment. Hope it is helpful to some of you.

Fredrick said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fredrick said...

I still think a temple in Papua New Guinea is a bit premature. The two stakes there are rather small and so are many of its districts. I wouldn't expect a temple annoucement there until there are at least five more stakes. PNG does not seem to have the same type of explosive growth we are seeing like in Ghana or Ivory Coast. The two stakes in PNG have been there since the past two decades.

I believe the Church will announce more temples in the US especially in areas where there are enough members and/or growth to warrant it, and where a temple can be constructed rather quickly. Having said that here is my prediction for the next five announced temples:

1. Managua Nicaragua
2. Bentonville, AR
3. Pocatello, ID
4. Missoula, MT
5. Lehi, UT

James said...

I appreciate your thoughts, Frederick. It is true that Papua New Guinea has not had sufficient unit or congregational growth. But those are just two of the factors that play into determining temple sites. I think of the temple being built in Winnipeg Manitoba, the last one that had a groundbreaking last year. It has the distinction of being the one and only temple in the Church to have a groundbreaking announcement precede the actual event by a mere 2.5 weeks. Anyway you slice it, that's short. My point is this: The temple in Winnipeg is being built to initially just serve the one stake there. So the fact that Papua New Guinea does not have that many Church units should not rule it out in any way from being considered as a strong candidate for a potential temple.

That said, I am fully on board with your other selections. Managua is likely because of the unit and congregational growth, because then-Elder Nelson publicly proposed it, and because land has been procured there. While the proposal of a temple in Missoula Montana has yet to be verified, we have the assurance that land has been purchased there. Though Bentonville has yet to be publicly proposed, such a site has been purchased. And Lehi, as I have before mentioned, will be, in my opinion, the very next temple announced in Utah County. This is strengthened by the Church unit growth there lately, the fact that the YSA Stake falling under the Mount Timpanogos Temple is based out of Lehi. And it so happens that the area in which such a temple is most likely to be built has been signed over to the city by my father-in-law, who owns several land parcels. I could see the Church procuring one or two such plots of land for a house of the Lord. I think that we will see any number of new temples during the next conference. I have settled on a safe average of at least three, though it would not surprise me if there were more or less announced. I am thrilled whenever new temples are announced, and I can't wait to see how many will be announced in just about a month and where they will be located.

John Pack Lambert said...

It split in 2002 to form the Anthem Stake. While 11 wards is technically enough to split, it usually happens when 1 stake has more units or involves multiple stakes.

John Pack Lambert said...

I think a temple in Kiribiti is a distict possibility. Also one in Papua New Guinea although I would be more confident in the later if the Church had made progress in getting more than 2 stakes there.

Another underpredicted temple in my view is Lumbumbashi, DR Congo. I think this will happen before the Kasai Region although Elder Andersen has spoken of the Kasai possibility. Lumbumbashi lacks easy ground ttransport to Kinshasa so that is not much help. My understanding is that for them Harare will be a closer temple. It still involves crossing 2 international borders if traveling by land. There are several stakes there. I expect it to be announced once the exterior work on the Kinshasa Temple is mainly complete.

John Pack Lambert said...

Since Benin City has more stakes than Laagos I would put it higher on a list.

John Pack Lambert said...

Winnipeg has had a long strong LDS presence with no realistic prospects for significant LDS growth in the near term. It is the long isolated long faithful story like Colonia Juarez. While Preaident Monson could decide any country that had a stake by 2000 should get a temple that has not happened yet. So I think the list of countries without a temple and number of stakes is our best list. However since stake creations are approved before they happen the list President Monson and his counselors are considering is a bit different than ours. For example if another stake for Kenya has been approved, which might be the case considering how large some districts are there I could see Nairobi getting a temple. Also with Moombasa on the coast having a district and Jinja being between Kampala and Nairobi that makes Nairobi more the center of Church districts in the area.

One issue is how hard is it to cross the Uganda/Kenya border. If it is fairly easy I am pretty sure Nairobi will get a temple announced. For what it is worth Kenya and Puerto Rico are the only two countries that have general authorities from them but do not have temples announced. PR has more stakes, and thwre are temples with 5 or fewer. Still I would be more confident in PR getting a temple if it got a stake or 2 more. Free movement between it and the US at times hinders Church development there.

Ryan Searcy said...

You should read up on the East Africa Federation. It is a proposed merge of (now) 6 countries in eastern Africa: Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi, and South Sudan. They are slowly trying to balance the economies in each country, so I imagine travel between those countries will be fairly easy. The proposed capital is Arusha, Tanzania. Arusha is near the border with Kenya and is nearby several distinct landmarks, such as Mount Kilimanjaro, the Serengeti, and Ngorongoro Crater.

I wonder if this plan goes through, that the temple might instead go in Arusha (highly doubtful since there is only a mission branch there) as a centralized location. Nairobi would be a central point for the stakes and districts in these countries, but Kampala would be easier access to Rwanda, Burundi, and South Sudan, all of which are pretty poor areas.

Ryan Searcy said...

South Sudan was admitted into the East Africa Community (the precursor of the EAF) just last year, and it will take some time for South Sudan to become integrated into the Community as the other 5 countries have already done with each other.

James said...

Interesting. I had not been aware of that development. Please keep me posted on that, Ryan!

I have done several blog posts of late. Additionally, in discussing my choices for temples that might be announced soon on the LDS Church Growth forum, I have determined that Tacoma Washington is not the great candidate I was originally led to believe for a future temple. So I have eliminated that city from my list. I just couldn't find a good enough reason to retain it.

If any of you want to check out either my blog or the LDS Church Growth forum, the links for both of those websites follow. Thanks.

http://stokessoundsoff.blogspot.com
http://ldsgrowth.proboards.com/

John Pack Lambert said...

I think the fact that Nairobi has 2 stakes and no other place in East Africa has more than 1 makes it the most likely candidate for a temple at present.

Ryan Searcy said...

Kampala also has 2 stakes.

Johnathan Whiting said...

I like that the two stakes that were created in February (Ammon, Idaho, and Frenchtown (Missoula), Montana) are in two towns/areas that I used to live. Makes me smile a bit. :)

brycen said...

So what does everyone think? Does this new stake raise the possibility of a second temple in Montana, and if so, where would be the most likely location?

Personally, I'm not sure whether Missoula would be a good location. It seems like it would only take in about 5-6 stakes in terms of what would be closest to that temple versus the ones in Billings and Cardston. Helena and Butte also seem like good possibilities, and would be more likely to pick up the two Great Falls stakes from the Cardston district. But Missoula would be more likely to take in the Kalispell stake.

Montana is so large that no one location in the western part of the state would be close for all of the stakes, but as they are currently traveling large distances to the temples in Billings, Cardston, and Spokane, I would think any of these locations would make a big improvement for quite a few people.

Incidentally, my family recently found out that an ancestor lived in Deer Lodge for a few years in the 1860s. There is now a ward there, part of the Butte Stake. Wherever the next temple in Montana happens to be placed, I'll be very interested.

brycen said...

I did a bit of research to determine the most likely city to get the next temple in Montana. I won't bore you with the details, which were based on travel times and distances from each stake center to 3 potential locations as well as the currently assigned temple, but I concluded that Butte, Helena, and Missoula are all about equally likely, as any of them would have 8 stakes in its district (Missoula possibly only 6 if the two stakes in Great Falls remain with the Cardston temple, which is almost exactly the same distance but in Canada). I really can't decide between these locations. Except: Did someone mention that one of these cities already had land for a temple?

Johnathan Whiting said...

I certainly hope that Missoula is where the next temple is in Montana (mostly based on personal bias).

Helena is the capital, but it's not a very big town.

Butte is a fairly ugly city (mostly because of the mine). Although it does have a beautiful Catholic Mary statue up on the cliff ("Our Lady of the Rockies"), and some nice churches and cathedrals, like the Church of the Immaculate Conception.

Missoula's also the 2nd largest city in Montana, so there may be more room for growth there. There will definitely be opposition from the liberals at the University of Montana, however.

Missoula is also a central hub for five valleys, it's generally considered the cultural center of Montana, and it is known as "The Garden City" for the many beautiful trees planted there.

Johnathan Whiting said...

@brycen:

Thanks for doing the research on the distances and travel times of Butte, Helena, and Missoula. That was something I was going to look up, but you beat me to it. :)

James and others previously spoke on this blog about a possible temple site in Frenchtown, MT (right next to Missoula). I wasn't aware that the site had ever been confirmed as a temple site, however, as I recall others saying that particular plot of land was going to be used by the church as a scout camp site.

Anybody please correct me if I'm wrong, and let me know what source you used to determine if that location is an actual or possible future temple location.

James said...

I have received reports that a temple was publicly proposed for Missoula Montana sometime in 2014 by Elder David A. Bednar as he presided over a stake conference there. The nature of those reports were such that I couldn't verify it. But I have since learned that a site has been purchased specifically for a temple there. The exact locale of that site is not clear. It might be in Frenchtown. I will have to take another look at the reports I have received in this regard. But that means that Missoula joins three others that I know for sure have a temple site purchased, and what I have heard has convinced me that such a temple will be announced when unit growth and and temple attendance in the area the future temple district will cover warrants that happening. For that reason, Missoula has taken the #4 spot on my list of temples that are most imminently likely to be announced soon. The other three are Managua Nicaragua, Port Moresby Papua New Guinea, and Bentonville Arkansas. And all of them have these same conditions attached to how soon the actual announcement will be made. More to come as I find out more. Hope that helps.

Johnathan Whiting said...

@James:

What's the inside source you're getting your info from about the temple site purchases? Or is it an "undisclosed" source?

Gnesileah said...

The mission zone leader serving in Missoula in early 2014 informed me that a temple site had recently been purchased in Frenchtown. However, take that information with a grain of salt. He could have been misinformed or mistaken...or maybe not.

James said...

Out of respect to those who have given me their assurance that they have done their research but wish to remain anonymous, I cannot say. But I am in a position to state unequicovally that these reports are beyond reproach. I can tell you what their qualifications are. Two of them follow and report on temple developments avidly, and the other two have personal ties to the areas in which these temples will be built someday. Beyond that, I cannot offer specifics. But I can say without question that we will have temples in Managua Nicaragua, Port Moresby Papua New Guinea, Bentonville Arkansas, and Missoula Montana when the factors I indicated above are met. And there are several other locations of which I don't know the particular city, but which have land purchased. The nature of these purchases has been such that the locations cannot yet be disclosed. And I know that such site purchases are not indicative of how soon we might see such temples actually announced, but I can say that the four are more likely sooner rather than later. And because of the reports I have received about growth in those areas, which go above and beyond these four assertions that land has been purchased, it will likely be within the next few years, if not before. Of that, I have no doubt. And I cannot say more than that regarding my resources. But I have done enough research to back up the notion that it will happen sooner rather than later, due to the factors that are generally used to determine temple sites. It will happen. Mark my words. Hope that helps.

James said...

I have redone my list of temples that might soon be announced. I posted a link to that revision on the first blog post on the main page of this site. But I repost the link here, for any that might want to see the list but have not been following that other conversation. Any feedback would be appreciated. I would prefer it if such feedback came in the comments section of that post, but I have no objection if it comes on either this topic or the other one to which this link was posted just a few minutes ago. I look forward to the feedback, wherever and however it comes.

And Gnesileah, you were one of many sources that tipped me off about the official purchase of the temple site for Missoula Montana. The many responses I have received, both publicly and privately, have led me to bring this list to where it is now. It is a sure thing that we will see two of the next United States temples being built in Missoula Montana and Bentonville Arkansas. There is a reason my blog has become one of the top Google search results for current and future temple-related developments. The feedback I have received, both public and private, has helped me conclude that there is merit in safely predicting several temples. And the edits I made to my list earlier today have come because of that feedback and my own research. Thanks to you all for your efforts to keep me informed. I look forward to receiving continued feedback on the work I do. Thanks again.

http://stokessoundsoff.blogspot.com/2017/03/revised-and-updated-predictions-for.html

James said...

After considering feedback received in response to my last blog post discussing this, I have yet again revised and revisited my list of near-future imminent temple possibilities. I welcome any feedback anyone would like to give. Thanks.

http://stokessoundsoff.blogspot.com/2017/03/most-imminent-future-temple-locations.html