Nemo takes a deep dive into the temple construction gravy train

[Dwight]

I'd certainly bow to your experience and such. I think generally what I have heard supports it, and peanuts may have just meant it wasn't excessive or anything. I would think it's a bit like service staff at a high end restaurant is making more in tips than someone at Chili's. It just goes with the territory, and for good/bad the church wants to spend a lot on temples.

Somewhat related I was in Utah around Memorial Day and it was not the usual neighborhood for a temple driving by the Taylorsville Temple which is right on the west side of I-215 and just north across the street is this shopping center that has been there as long as I can remember (Google Street View). It felt a lot different than the photos I had seen which only showed the temple and the Oquirrh Mountains in the background.

[Dr Moore]

If not done by member-owned construction companies, the money would be spent anyway and someone else would make their fair profit. So who cares who earned the money?

I think the point is that temples are built specifically so that member-owned construction companies can rake in excessive profits. If not done by member-owned companies, as you say, then the church wouldn't bother building so many temples in the first place.

This idea strikes me as a nonsensical conspiracy theory.

[MG 2.0]

One YouTube comment made what I feel is a good point: if the goal is to save as many dead people as possible then that can be more effectively accomplished in the thousands of existing ward and stake buildings.

It’s unthinkable that the Jesus of the New Testament would require a million dollar chandelier in the building to make the ordinances stick. If anything he would advocate for the exact opposite.

You put Jesus into an awfully small box.

He is the God of all. Including the resources and materials, and yes, the means by which temples are constructed. To restrict His movements and constrain the parameters by which He accomplishes His work on the earth is a fool’s errand.

But, of course, if you take the view that it’s all ‘of man’, exclusively, you will see things with somewhat jaundiced eyes.

Telling Jesus how to do His work? You’re riding a very tall high horse.

Regards,
MG

[Dwight]

I will try and find it but someone did do an investigation of new houses built around temples. My Google-fu is failing me, but they had found a case that someone had donated the property to the church so they saved there, and then the person sold the property around it to developers who built houses. The person found that new home construction could get a premium, but only for the first seller. They speculated it was due to retiring couples wanting to be close to a temple to do temple work who have a lot of capital and want a home they don’t necessarily need to be fixing up in their retirement years. Then those houses might start to really come on the market in 5-7 years and while it’s not at a loss it isn’t the same appreciation other houses in the nearby area grew. So the proximity to the temple premium wears off in the market.

Still looking for that post or article I read, but here is the account from Satterfield Realty and Development about donating land for the temple in Pocatello in a subdivision they were developing.

[drumdude]

One YouTube comment made what I feel is a good point: if the goal is to save as many dead people as possible then that can be more effectively accomplished in the thousands of existing ward and stake buildings.

It’s unthinkable that the Jesus of the New Testament would require a million dollar chandelier in the building to make the ordinances stick. If anything he would advocate for the exact opposite.

You put Jesus into an awfully small box.

He is the God of all. Including the resources and materials, and yes, the means by which temples are constructed. To restrict His movements and constrain the parameters by which He accomplishes His work on the earth is a fool’s errand.

But, of course, if you take the view that it’s all ‘of man’, exclusively, you will see things with somewhat jaundiced eyes.

Telling Jesus how to do His work? You’re riding a very tall high horse.

Regards,
MG

I guess you and I read his words in the New Testament very differently.

I would suggest you re-read Matthew 6, and try to do it with an open mind that Joseph Smith might be a false prophet. It could open your eyes.

[pistolero]

It's not just temples, it's also chapels. And it's not just the main structures, the interiors are all part of the gravy train. Local contractors won't probably build a font and some oxen. The chandeliers might be imported too. Moroni and trumpet must be imported surely? I know for a fact that the interior faux gold effect people get shipped in from SLC (who family make the trip) - not sure if contractors or LDS inc. employees. But to be fair to them, when I spoke with them they were down to earth and recognised the beauty of many of the historical buildings in the UK and recognised that their faux effect wasn't up to scratch and were actually a bit embarrassed by it... comparatively speaking.

A typical example for chapels. Check out this "Beehive Folding Partitions" company. Based on North Yorkshire, UK. The directors are local members, check out in Companies House. Not sure how they are entangled in church aristocracy though - but surely they are? This is the catalogue page: http://beehive-partitions.com/files/411 ... ochure.pdf

They sell the "Won-Door" corporation (SLC), accordion doors that separate classrooms in every chapel in the UK. Not going to lie, some poor foresight thinking this might be a sustainable source of income - although they seem to have diversified their income sources. Not sure when the next chapel will be constructed in the UK.

[Dr Exiled]

My father was in construction back in the 70's and 80's. He knew the Oaklands and Jacobsens and found them to be stand up guys for what its worth. If I remember correctly, as sweeper boy no. 2 in the family construction business ( I really got to know the SL dump) my father would reach out to one of the Oaklands for advice from time to time.

Also, if you are going to construct a "holy" building, I don't see it as remarkable that members would be the GC's.

[MG 2.0]

You put Jesus into an awfully small box.

He is the God of all. Including the resources and materials, and yes, the means by which temples are constructed. To restrict His movements and constrain the parameters by which He accomplishes His work on the earth is a fool’s errand.

But, of course, if you take the view that it’s all ‘of man’, exclusively, you will see things with somewhat jaundiced eyes.

Telling Jesus how to do His work? You’re riding a very tall high horse.

Regards,
MG

I guess you and I read his words in the New Testament very differently.

I would suggest you re-read Matthew 6, and try to do it with an open mind that Joseph Smith might be a false prophet. It could open your eyes.

There may be more to Jesus than what meets the eye in the New Testament.

For one thing, how might we think of Jesus in regards to how He might function as CEO of a multinational church with millions of members? Can you second guess Him?

Again, it’s possible that you’re putting the Creator of ‘all that we know’ into a box of your own making. I don’t want to derail this thread, so I’ll leave it there unless you feel differently.

Temples are resource intensive in their development and construction. No one is arguing that.

Although once they’re built they are fairly inexpensive to operate in as far as human operations are concerned. Pretty much free labor.

I question why this ‘gravy train’ is even under discussion except to show where the money trails go. One might expect that the trails would follow tried and true trajectories.

Regards,
MG

[drumdude]

For one thing, how might we think of Jesus in regards to how He might function as CEO of a multinational church with millions of members?

I can’t imagine the person described in the New Testament acting as such. You’re right that we will just have to disagree on this.

[Dr. Shades]

I think the point is that temples are built specifically so that member-owned construction companies can rake in excessive profits. If not done by member-owned companies, as you say, then the church wouldn't bother building so many temples in the first place.

This idea strikes me as a nonsensical conspiracy theory.

In that case, educate me: Why are the companies owned by general authorities’ family members always the ones to get the sweetheart contracts and not random general contractors?