New "modular" temples

[Reluctant Watchman]

This is... interesting: "LDS Church showcases its first ‘modular’ temple; more will be coming ‘where it makes sense to do so’"

"Binge" is an appropriate word.

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2023/05 ... its-first/

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints unveiled its first modular temple Monday, the single-spired, nearly 10,000-square-foot edifice in Helena, Mont.

The temple’s modules were constructed in dozens of pieces in Alabama and then shrink-wrapped and transported by semitruck to Helena, according to a news release from the Utah-based faith. Workers then connected the pieces on-site.

The church has been on a temple-building binge of sorts since President Russell M. Nelson assumed the reins in January 2018. The number of existing or planned temples worldwide now numbers 315, according to the church, with Nelson announcing 133 of them, 42% of the total tally.

“This prolific and unprecedented season of temple announcements,” the release said, “has moved church leaders to consider ways to expedite construction while maintaining the same high-quality craftsmanship.”

[TwochurchesOnly]

This is... interesting: "LDS Church showcases its first ‘modular’ temple; more will be coming ‘where it makes sense to do so’"

"Binge" is an appropriate word.

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2023/05 ... its-first/

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints unveiled its first modular temple Monday, the single-spired, nearly 10,000-square-foot edifice in Helena, Mont.

The temple’s modules were constructed in dozens of pieces in Alabama and then shrink-wrapped and transported by semitruck to Helena, according to a news release from the Utah-based faith. Workers then connected the pieces on-site.

The church has been on a temple-building binge of sorts since President Russell M. Nelson assumed the reins in January 2018. The number of existing or planned temples worldwide now numbers 315, according to the church, with Nelson announcing 133 of them, 42% of the total tally.

“This prolific and unprecedented season of temple announcements,” the release said, “has moved church leaders to consider ways to expedite construction while maintaining the same high-quality craftsmanship.”

How bout building a few hundred module homes, shrink wrapping and shipping them to homeless .. oh, wait
that would only encourage freeloading low- lifers to join the one true church

[Sunain]

Modular is the wrong term. The correct term is prefab. Prefabricated buildings allow construction in a stable weather environment and allows for better construction efficiency.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Modular is the wrong term. The correct term is prefab.

Yeah, after reading the article that is a much more accurate term.

[Reluctant Watchman]

How bout building a few hundred module homes, shrink wrapping and shipping them to homeless .. oh, wait
that would only encourage freeloading low- lifers to join the one true church

I estimated that the average annual ward tithes worldwide are between $350k - $450k. Just imagine what a ward could do with that $$$ to alleviate financial stress.

[Niemand]

I'm surprised that the church hasn't pioneered mobile temples. These could come in the form of trucks, ships or even planes.

[Wolfwoman]

Haha I saw that article and had to come here to see if anyone was talking about it.
Modular sounds so awful. Maybe it’s just the connotation in my mind with modular. But I don’t like that word associated with the word temple.

[Robin Hood]

Modular is the wrong term. The correct term is prefab. Prefabricated buildings allow construction in a stable weather environment and allows for better construction efficiency.

Yeah, but they're not proper brick/stone and mortar buildings. Seems to me these buildings could be described as temple-lite.

[Rubicon]

Haha I saw that article and had to come here to see if anyone was talking about it.
Modular sounds so awful. Maybe it’s just the connotation in my mind with modular. But I don’t like that word associated with the word temple.

When the LDS community rejected the original site for the Tooele temple, the Church angrily moved it somewhere else (it was viewed even by active members as not being a good site in terms of their developments, etc.). The Church hinted that if people didn't want it in their backyard, then it would go where people appreciated it. I remember online jokes about a Tooele temple, in order to blend in with the surroundings, being a trailer with a gravel driveway, rusted out cars up on blocks, etc.

That's what comes to mind with the word "modular," and I say that as someone who raised my kids in a "manufactured home" (or trailer, or modular home). They are a very affordable option, and just as good as "real" houses. I'm not against them, but I appreciate a good joke as much as the next guy.

[zionssuburb]

I'm surprised that the church hasn't pioneered mobile temples. These could come in the form of trucks, ships or even planes.

There was a proposal to buy surplus Liberty Ships (the huge troop transports) for this purpose. One would sail around the countries of Europe and the other the South Pacific. That would've been cool

[zionssuburb]

I thought modular indicated that multiple rooms could be used for multiple purposes, one configuration could be a sealing room, another configuration could be for initatories , etc.. the baptistry could be covered by a modular floor and used as an endowment room... etc...

[Subcomandante]

I think those new temples are quite cool.

There's been an acceleration in temple building because they are necessary to fulfill the work quicker. Brigham Young spoke of thousands of temples in the Millennium.

[Dusty Wanderer]

On the principle of modular or portable construction for temples (not getting into costs, local commitment, etc), I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it.

The tabernacle itself shows that brick and mortar aren’t absolute requirements.

[Reluctant Watchman]

There's been an acceleration in temple building because they are necessary to fulfill the work quicker. Brigham Young spoke of thousands of temples in the Millennium.

If only the work done there was actually valid and contained truth instead of "the philosophies of men, mingled w/scripture."

[Chip]

Sounds like a step above "double-wide".

[Reluctant Watchman]

I've stated this before, I fully believe the Lord would sustain a mud hut temple vs. what it has become today. The experiences should be about keys of knowledge and correct principles.

[mudflap]

I've stated this before, I fully believe the Lord would sustain a mud hut temple vs. what is has become today. It's about keys of knowledge and correct principles.

maybe - I mean "yes", if that was "the best they could do". But Moses's tabernacle was made of the finest materials - even the ark - made out of wood - was covered with gold. The fabric was the best they could get, the tent poles were brass, everything was fine workmanship.

Didn't the women break their best china into a fine powder to be used as a coating for the Kirtland temple?

And the SLC temple was made from granite, even though sandstone was easier and closer to the build site.

Folks in Manti lived in holes in the ground while they built that temple.

A lot of timber was rejected during the Logan temple construction.

It was all about sacrifice, and doing the best and finest workmanship, no matter the cost.

so yeah, keys of knowledge and correct principles - but still the finest materials available. Modular has come a long way - and they are correct to use it in Alaska with wide temperature swings - just 10 degrees and some humidity means the difference between doors at my cabin that "click to close" vs doors that go "whump!" when they close.

Modular does give the impression of "cheap", but I think that's just psychological conditioning by Ivory Homes...

I spent 6 months of my life sanding door frames for the Timpanogas Temple by hand. Sand, paint, sand paint, sand paint - a never ending cycle.

The bigger problem I have is outsourcing our faith - we - as a people - don't actually build temples any more - or churches. or food processing plants, much less food storage - we outsource everything - we hire contractors to build our stuff. I know, I know - the church argument is "but we hire the very best contractors...." and "no one in the church is skilled enough to build to our standards..." My question is "why?" Why are our own people not skilled enough? is it because they are too busy pursuing law degrees at BYU? Do we think, as a church, that it's okay to just throw money at problems to solve them? I just don't think that's the way to go.

IMO, you are a lot more invested (and will be closer to God) in a building you personally sweat, bled, and cried over to get some level of fine craftsmanship into it:



I mean, anybody can spend money to get a "fine sanctuary".....

[Reluctant Watchman]

I've stated this before, I fully believe the Lord would sustain a mud hut temple vs. what is has become today. It's about keys of knowledge and correct principles.

maybe - I mean "yes", if that was "the best they could do". But Moses's tabernacle was made of the finest materials - even the ark - made out of wood - was covered with gold. The fabric was the best they could get, the tent poles were brass, everything was fine workmanship.

Didn't the women break their best china into a fine powder to be used as a coating for the Kirtland temple?

And the SLC temple was made from granite, even though sandstone was easier and closer to the build site.

Folks in Manti lived in holes in the ground while they built that temple.

A lot of timber was rejected during the Logan temple construction.

It was all about sacrifice, and doing the best and finest workmanship, no matter the cost.

so yeah, keys of knowledge and correct principles - but still the finest materials available. Modular has come a long way - and they are correct to use it in Alaska with wide temperature swings - just 10 degrees and some humidity means the difference between doors at my cabin that "click to close" vs doors that go "whump!" when they close.

Modular does give the impression of "cheap", but I think that's just psychological conditioning by Ivory Homes...

I spent 6 months of my life sanding door frames for the Timpanogas Temple by hand. Sand, paint, sand paint, sand paint - a never ending cycle.

The bigger problem I have is outsourcing our faith - we - as a people - don't actually build temples any more - or churches. or food processing plants, much less food storage - we outsource everything - we hire contractors to build our stuff. I know, I know - the church argument is "but we hire the very best contractors...." and "no one in the church is skilled enough to build to our standards..." My question is "why?" Why are our own people not skilled enough? is it because they are too busy pursuing law degrees at BYU? Do we think, as a church, that it's okay to just throw money at problems to solve them? I just don't think that's the way to go.

IMO, you are a lot more invested (and will be closer to God) in a building you personally sweat, bled, and cried over to get some level of fine craftsmanship into it:



I mean, anybody can spend money to get a "fine sanctuary".....

The structure means nothing if false precepts and partial truths are taught. And that's to say nothing of the price of admission and your oath-like covenant to the flesh.

And I'm ok w/a "fine sanctuary" if ALL of the people are cared for and correct laws and principles taught and lived.

[mudflap]

I've stated this before, I fully believe the Lord would sustain a mud hut temple vs. what is has become today. It's about keys of knowledge and correct principles.

maybe - I mean "yes", if that was "the best they could do". But Moses's tabernacle was made of the finest materials - even the ark - made out of wood - was covered with gold. The fabric was the best they could get, the tent poles were brass, everything was fine workmanship.

Didn't the women break their best china into a fine powder to be used as a coating for the Kirtland temple?

And the SLC temple was made from granite, even though sandstone was easier and closer to the build site.

Folks in Manti lived in holes in the ground while they built that temple.

A lot of timber was rejected during the Logan temple construction.

It was all about sacrifice, and doing the best and finest workmanship, no matter the cost.

so yeah, keys of knowledge and correct principles - but still the finest materials available. Modular has come a long way - and they are correct to use it in Alaska with wide temperature swings - just 10 degrees and some humidity means the difference between doors at my cabin that "click to close" vs doors that go "whump!" when they close.

Modular does give the impression of "cheap", but I think that's just psychological conditioning by Ivory Homes...

I spent 6 months of my life sanding door frames for the Timpanogas Temple by hand. Sand, paint, sand paint, sand paint - a never ending cycle.

The bigger problem I have is outsourcing our faith - we - as a people - don't actually build temples any more - or churches. or food processing plants, much less food storage - we outsource everything - we hire contractors to build our stuff. I know, I know - the church argument is "but we hire the very best contractors...." and "no one in the church is skilled enough to build to our standards..." My question is "why?" Why are our own people not skilled enough? is it because they are too busy pursuing law degrees at BYU? Do we think, as a church, that it's okay to just throw money at problems to solve them? I just don't think that's the way to go.

IMO, you are a lot more invested (and will be closer to God) in a building you personally sweat, bled, and cried over to get some level of fine craftsmanship into it:



I mean, anybody can spend money to get a "fine sanctuary".....

The structure means nothing if false precepts and partial truths are taught. And that's to say nothing of the price of admission and your oath-like covenant to the flesh.

And I'm ok w/a "fine sanctuary" if ALL of the people are cared for and correct laws and principles taught and lived.

yes.

I was just commenting on how a mud hut might not be on par with what the Lord apparently requires, according to precedent, unless that actually IS "the best they can do" / and/or the mud hut is built with the finest mud available.

[Reluctant Watchman]

I was just commenting on how a mud hut might not be on par with what the Lord apparently requires, according to precedent, unless that actually IS "the best they can do" / and/or the mud hut is built with the finest mud available.

I still hold to the belief that He'd rather worship in a humble setting. I mean, how much more beautiful can you get than nature? Why not just have the ordinances outside?

[mudflap]

I was just commenting on how a mud hut might not be on par with what the Lord apparently requires, according to precedent, unless that actually IS "the best they can do" / and/or the mud hut is built with the finest mud available.

I still hold to the belief that He'd rather worship in a humble setting. I mean, how much more beautiful can you get than nature? Why not just have the ordinances outside?

Because that's not the pattern - it's not the end goal. Sure, it's fine in a pinch, but it's not what we were made for - we were made to build things. I've had some of my finest and most sublime revelations out in nature. I've also seen beautiful human workmanship that emulates Godliness and inspires a striving for perfection <- which is the entire point of a temple. To take what nature produces and craft it into functional products is one of the closest things I can do to emulate the Creator, next to becoming a father. After all: He took raw materials and crafted the earth. I can do a crude form of that by turning oak trees into a beautiful counter top. And it is a form of worship, IMO.

Even the brother of Jared didn't just dig up some rocks and present them to the Lord - he took some time and molted them (Ether 3:1) - he put some labor into his effort to worship - just like we're supposed to do when we build a temple, rather than just worshiping out in nature. Nature is fine and all, it's just not the end goal, from how I read in the scriptures.

The scriptural and historical precedent of the Lord's chosen people is eventually a physical temple, built with fine workmanship and materials: Israel, the Nephites, the early Saints all followed this pattern. And in the future - more temples - it's in Revelation, Ezekiel, and Isaiah.

[Reluctant Watchman]

I was just commenting on how a mud hut might not be on par with what the Lord apparently requires, according to precedent, unless that actually IS "the best they can do" / and/or the mud hut is built with the finest mud available.

I still hold to the belief that He'd rather worship in a humble setting. I mean, how much more beautiful can you get than nature? Why not just have the ordinances outside?

Because that's not the pattern - it's not the end goal. Sure, it's fine in a pinch, but it's not what we were made for - we were made to build things. I've had some of my finest and most sublime revelations out in nature. I've also seen beautiful human workmanship that emulates Godliness and inspires a striving for perfection <- which is the entire point of a temple. To take what nature produces and craft it into functional products is one of the closest things I can do to emulate the Creator, next to becoming a father. After all: He took raw materials and crafted the earth. I can do a crude form of that by turning oak trees into a beautiful counter top. And it is a form of worship, IMO.

Even the brother of Jared didn't just dig up some rocks and present them to the Lord - he took some time and molted them (Ether 3:1) - he put some labor into his effort to worship - just like we're supposed to do when we build a temple, rather than just worshiping out in nature. Nature is fine and all, it's just not the end goal, from how I read in the scriptures.

The scriptural and historical precedent of the Lord's chosen people is eventually a physical temple, built with fine workmanship and materials: Israel, the Nephites, the early Saints all followed this pattern. And in the future - more temples - it's in Revelation, Ezekiel, and Isaiah.

While the "pattern" may fit some scriptural examples, a place of worship can be incredibly simple. Adam and Eve's altar was not glamorous. As I noted earlier, sure, have a beautiful place to worship, but only if ALL are taken care of (true consecration) and correct principles and truths are taught.

[Ymarsakar]

I have a new modular temple, it is called my body.

[mudflap]

I still hold to the belief that He'd rather worship in a humble setting. I mean, how much more beautiful can you get than nature? Why not just have the ordinances outside?

Because that's not the pattern - it's not the end goal. Sure, it's fine in a pinch, but it's not what we were made for - we were made to build things. I've had some of my finest and most sublime revelations out in nature. I've also seen beautiful human workmanship that emulates Godliness and inspires a striving for perfection <- which is the entire point of a temple. To take what nature produces and craft it into functional products is one of the closest things I can do to emulate the Creator, next to becoming a father. After all: He took raw materials and crafted the earth. I can do a crude form of that by turning oak trees into a beautiful counter top. And it is a form of worship, IMO.

Even the brother of Jared didn't just dig up some rocks and present them to the Lord - he took some time and molted them (Ether 3:1) - he put some labor into his effort to worship - just like we're supposed to do when we build a temple, rather than just worshiping out in nature. Nature is fine and all, it's just not the end goal, from how I read in the scriptures.

The scriptural and historical precedent of the Lord's chosen people is eventually a physical temple, built with fine workmanship and materials: Israel, the Nephites, the early Saints all followed this pattern. And in the future - more temples - it's in Revelation, Ezekiel, and Isaiah.

While the "pattern" may fit some scriptural examples, a place of worship can be incredibly simple. Adam and Eve's altar was not glamorous. As I noted earlier, sure, have a beautiful place to worship, but only if ALL are taken care of (true consecration) and correct principles and truths are taught.

yes, it wasn't glamorous - but they did put some effort into it - they didn't just find a random pile of rocks somewhere and use that.

But no, the true pattern is not to take care of everyone first and then build a temple. The true pattern is sacrifice. Jesus said, "the poor you always have among you".

I know you're about to embark on a journey of building - you're going to enjoy it and hate it- sometimes at the same time, but in the end, you're going to enjoy it.

There are some things you can learn in no other way than by doing them. There's a lot of spiritual lessons I've learned by building a home, and I can't seem to transmit them to another person. I wish you the best on this journey, and I hope you'll document it and share your progress - I'm really looking forward to your experience.

[Reluctant Watchman]

But no, the true pattern is not to take care of everyone first and then build a temple. The true pattern is sacrifice. Jesus said, "the poor you always have among you".

I strongly believe this verse has been used to justify class distinction and the glorification of idols and to abuse the poor. It's the same scripture the LDS org uses to justify their fine sanctuaries.