Historical Changes in the Church Sacrament Service

                      A typical Sacrament cup and pitcher.
                      Photo from the "West Layton/Layton 2nd Wards" history book, 1895-1995; 


THE Sacrament Service in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints hasn't always been as it is today.

-For a time in the 19th Century, all members of the congregation also kneeled down as the two Sacrament prayers were given.

-Also, for some years, music was often played during the passing of the Sacrament.

-There weren't always Sacrament trays for the water. A pitcher and mug were used for many decades, stretching into the early 1950s in some areas.
It certainly didn't seem very sanitary to share the same cup, but other churches did this too. Members tried to drink at a different spot around the rim of the cup than others, but most used the area opposite the handle.

SOURCES: "West Layton/Layton 2nd Wards" history, 1895-1995; Deseret News Archives.

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

When the bishop paid young mens' tithing by a loan ...

THE Bishop of the Layton Utah Second Ward, Wayne H. Flint, thought it so important for all Aaronic Priesthood holders to be a full-tithe payer in the Church, that he paid their tithing for them, if they were unable to do so.
From about 1959-1966 this took place.
However, the young men were charged with responsibility of paying the Bishop back. And, according to the book, "West Layton/Layton 2nd Wards, 1895-1995," "All loans were repaid."

North America for Book of Mormon, not South America?

THERE'S an on-going debate about where the Book of Mormon took place geographically.
The common belief is that it took place in Central or South America.
However, I've been leaning more toward North America in recent years and with good reason.
First, the Golden Plates that the Prophet Joseph found and translated the Book of Mormon from, with divine assistance, were located in North America -- specifically the Hill Cumorah, Palmyra, New York.
I just don't buy into the fact that the Nephites and Lamanites traveled so many thousands of miles between Central, North and/or South America.
For example, the distance between Costa Rica and New York is more than 2,200 miles.

              Snow in the Book of Mormon? A hint of North America in this painting?

North America is the promised land and I'm starting to believe this is where most of the Book of Mormon stories took place.
(There was a great physical upheaval and change in the landscape of North America after the Jesus Christ was killed on the other side of the world too.)
-Anyway, debate away on this subject and here are some LESS COMMON factors to argue in the favor of North America.

  The Wasatch Mountains of the greater Salt Lake area (in the background) as they appear looking west from the Bald Mountain area.

1. Brigham Young taught that the Gadianton Robbers used to flee to and inhabit the Wasatch Mountains on Northern Utah. (See Journal of Discourses 8:344).
How could that be, unless the Book of Mormon did indeed take place in today's area of Utah?

           The Pine Valley Mountains, north of St. George.                               Photo by Liz A. Hafen

2. According to a more contemporary source, the Color County Spectrum newspaper in St. George, Utah, a story on August 13, 1977, there was a 19th Century sawmill in the Pine Valley Mountains north of St. George, that used to experience weird events. For example, saw blades were found broken overnight, tools disappeared and there were other problems -- all with no evidence of thieves or pranksters having visited there overnight.
The story goes that Brigham Young was asked about this problem during one of his visits to St. George.
He told the people that some Gadianton robbers were buried on that property and if the saw mill was just moved, the problems would go away.
(It is about 300 miles between the Wasatch Mountains of Salt Lake and the Pine Valley Mountains -- that I can accept as the Gadianton Robbers traveling between ....)

So, the debate goes on about Book of Mormon location .....

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

Miracle of the Washington, D.C. Temple Guard Dog: Zacharias

              The original sketch concept of the Washington, D.C. Temple, by Keith W. Wilcox.

By Lynn Arave

SOMETIMES it is difficult to separate fact from fiction.
I'd heard the tale of the miraculous Washington, D.C. LDS Temple "guard dog" for years, but wondered if it was really true, or was it one of those "faith-promoting rumors" -- an urban legend of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
-Finally, on Oct. 27, 2014, I got a chance to visit with and interview Sister Viva May Wilcox, widow of one of the D.C. Temple's four architects, the late Keith W. Wilcox of Ogden, Utah. (Wilcox's sketch was used for the Temple's outside design.)
She said the story was true. (She didn't recall what the dog was called, though.)
Later, I found out the dog was a German Shepherd, who was eventually named Zacharias.

      This is NOT an actual picture of Zacharias the Temple Guard Dog, but rather a generic German Shepherd photograph.                                                                           Photo from Wikipedia Commons.

The large dog did indeed strangely show up at the temple grounds right when it was needed, to help curb the theft of construction materials and vandalism at the isolated temple site overnight.

(Otherwise, temple officials were considering hiring more security employees.)

A temple office worker, Judy Emily Cox, gave the dog his Biblical name. Zac the Temple Guard Dog was how some referred to the animal.
On one occasion, the canine even lessened the damage from a fire that had started in the Temple's Annex building one night, when it refused to leave that area.

The dog would sleep under the desk of the construction site superintendent during the day and patrolled the temple grounds at night.

Sister Wilcox said no one knows where it came from. The animal simply acted like it was supposed to guard the grounds after the workers left for the night.
A temple worker eventually adopted the dog after the Temple was completed.

When the dog died, probably in the early 1980s, it was buried on the temple grounds and there was even an official headstone.

 The dog’s grave was apparently located on the west side of the Temple grounds. Another church member said he took a special tour of the temple grounds in 1998. He said the grave was still there then and that the Temple President had referred to it as the only known grave of any type on the grounds of any Latter-Day Saint temple.

Peggy Ennis Schmidt said she and her husband served in the DC Temple from 2005-2007. During their introduction to the temple, they were shown a video of the construction phase, with the volunteer guard dog included. They also visited the burial site/memorial of the dog, just a short walk from the Visitors Center. Later, according to Sister Schmidt, a succeeding temple president didn't care for the apparently popular practice of people coming to the temple grounds to see the grave of a dog. He had the memorial removed, possibly around the early 2010s.

One church member in the Washington, D.C. area contacted the author years later and said he recalled that his ward building library at one time had a VHS videotape of the dog, but that someone had discarded it when the meetinghouse was remodeled.

So, there's the canine miracle of the LDS Church.
And, ALL dogs do go to heaven ... especially Zacharias.

  A stained glass-like rendition of the Washington, D.C. LDS Temple, that the Wilcox home has hanging in the front window.

SOURCES:

-Interview with Viva May Gammell Wilcox, at her home in Ogden, Utah on October 27, 2014. Sister Wilcox is the wife of the late Keith Wilcox, Washington, D.C. Temple architect.

-KSL-TV documentary, “Washington DC Temple — A Sacred Monument in a City of Monuments,” by Carole Mikita, October 2, 2022.

NOTE: If you like dogs, search for my related blog entry on "All Dogs go to Heaven -- and to the Spirit World too! The 'Henrie" Miracle."

NOTE 2: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 

Back when you could 'Review' Sacrament Meetings ...

I found this intriguing "Sacrament meeting checklist" (copied below) in the September 1961 Improvement Era magazine, page 679 (forerunner to today's Ensign Magazine).

The list wanted members to rate their Sacrament meeting quality, with 340 total points possible. I especially liked question No.15: "Did the speaker(s) ramble?" (worth 0-10 points). 

Nothing like that would fly 53 years later .....

Of course, that was back in the pre-three-hour block time era when Sacrament meetings were 1 1/2 hours or more too.

-What is bothersome about some talks in sacrament meetings?

Speakers who clearly have not timed their talks and have no idea how long it is and/or who can't end on time.

-Another change is that in recent years: most Sacrament meeting talks are plain routine. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints went from letting speakers talk about pretty much what they wanted to in most of the 20th Century to giving rigid, assigned subjects -- even to returned missionaries -- today.
Many talks today are just recapping what was said at the last General Conference.
Also, "guest" speakers -- those from outside your ward or stake -- pretty much vanished in the 21st Century.
It is somewhat of a balancing act -- teaching basic and correct doctrine while keeping the audience listening. If no one is really listening to a speaker, why are they speaking?
Yes, the Church is a lay Church, without professionals, but having more interesting subjects and speakers would always be a plus.
Hopefully a change in 2015 to have Ward Councils also have input on Sacrament meeting speakers/topics -- with bishopbrics -- could be another future positive.

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

Is hunting animals OK in a Gospel Sense?

                    Buffalo in Yellowstone National Park, where hunting is outlawed.

Is hunting animals in the modern age OK?

You can decide for yourself after reading material from leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints below:

Is it a sin to kill animals wantonly?
That was a question President Joseph Fielding Smith answered in the August 1961 Improvement Era Magazine (forerunner to today's Ensign Magazine).

This was advice on hunting or killing animals 17 years before President Spencer W. Kimball did so in October 1978 General Conference.

President Smith told the story of the Prophet Joseph Smith advocating the brethren on a trip with him not to kill some rattlesnakes.

"I exhorted the brethren not to kill a serpent, bird, or an animal of any kind during my journey unless it became necessary in order to preserve ourselves from hunger," Joseph Smith said.

On another occasion the Prophet shot a squirrel some of the brethren were watching in a tree and then walked way, leaving the dead animal on the ground.

Brother Orson Hyde picked up the dead animal and said, 'We will cook it that nothing may be lost.'

"I perceived that the brethren understood what I did it for, and in their practice gave more heed to be precept than to my example which was right," the Prophet Joseph Smith wrote.

President Joseph Fielding Smith said there are times when killing animals is necessary when it is the survival of the fittest, or when animals may become a plague to mankind.

                  A water snake on a rock by the South Fork of the Ogden River.

(For example, during the construction of the Manti Temple, some 300 rattlesnakes had to be killed, since they infested the ground underneath the temple building site.)

President Joseph F. Smith stated: "I never could see why a man should be imbued with a blood-thirsty desire to kill and destroy animal life ... I do not believe any man should kill animals or birds unless he needs them for food."

President Joseph F. Smith then said it is wrong to hunt deer, antelope, elk, just for the fun of it, or just because a person likes to shoot and destroy life.

President Spencer W. Kimball's 1978 sermon was:

"Our Father in Heaven was gracious enough to give to us for our pleasure and convenience all life on earth. Let me read to you from his personal statement:

'And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

'And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

'And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

'And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.' (Gen. 1:20, 29–31.)

"I read at the priesthood meeting at the last conference the words to the verse of the song years ago, “Don’t Kill the Little Birds,” with which I was familiar when I was a child growing up in Arizona. I found many young boys around my age who, with their flippers and their slings, destroyed many birds.

"In Primary and Sunday School we sang the song:

Don’t kill the little birds

That sing on bush and tree,

All thro’ the summer days,

Their sweetest melody.

"As I was talking to the young men at that time all over the world, I felt that I should say something more along this line.

"I suppose in every country in the world there are beautiful little birds with their beautiful plumage and their attractive songs.

"I remember that my predecessor, President Joseph Fielding Smith, was a protector of these feathered and other wild life creatures.

"While President Smith at one time was in the Wasatch Mountain Area, he befriended the creatures from the hill and forest. He composed four little verses as follows, and opposite each he drew a little picture. Of the mountain squirrel first, he wrote:

This is little Chopper Squirrel

Up in the mountains high.

He begs us for some grains of corn,

With thanks he says goodbye.

And then the bat was next:

This is little Tommy Bat

Who flies around at night.

He eats the bugs and ‘skeeters’ too,

Which is a thing quite right.

Then he came to the deer:

This is little Bambi Deer

Who comes to the cabin homes.

She licks the salt we feed to her,

And on the mountain roams.

And then the birds:

This, our little feathered friend

Who sings for us all day.

When comes the winter and the cold,

He wisely flies away.

"Now, I also would like to add some of my feelings concerning the unnecessary shedding of blood and destruction of life. I think that every soul should be impressed by the sentiments that have been expressed here by the prophets.

"And not less with reference to the killing of innocent birds is the wildlife of our country that live upon the vermin that are indeed enemies to the farmer and to mankind. It is not only wicked to destroy them, it is a shame, in my opinion. I think that this principle should extend not only to the bird life but to the life of all animals. For that purpose I read the scripture where the Lord gave us all the animals. Seemingly, he thought it was important that all these animals be on the earth for our use and encouragement."

"President Joseph F. Smith said, 'When I visited, a few years ago, the Yellowstone National Park, and saw in the streams and the beautiful lakes, birds swimming quite fearless of man, allowing passers-by to approach them as closely almost as tame birds, and apprehending no fear of them, and when I saw droves of beautiful deer [feeding] along the side of the road, as fearless of the presence of men as any domestic animal, it filled my heart with a degree of peace and joy that seemed to be almost a foretaste of that period hoped for when there shall be none to hurt and none to molest in all the land, especially among all the inhabitants of Zion. These same birds, if they were to visit other regions, inhabited by man, would, on account of their tameness, doubtless become more easily a prey to the gunner. The same may be said of those beautiful creatures—the deer and the antelope. If they should wander out of the park, beyond the protection that is established there for these animals, they would become, of course, an easy prey to those who were seeking their lives. I never could see why a man should be imbued with a blood-thirsty desire to kill and destroy animal life. I have known men—and they still exist among us—who enjoy what is, to them, the ‘sport’ of hunting birds and slaying them by the hundreds, and who will come in after a day’s sport, boasting of how many harmless birds they have had the skill to slaughter, and day after day, during the season when it is lawful for men to hunt and kill (the birds having had a season of protection and not apprehending danger) go out by scores or hundreds, and you may hear their guns early in the morning on the day of the opening, as if great armies had met in battle; and the terrible work of slaughtering the innocent birds goes on.

'I do not believe any man should kill animals or birds unless he needs them for food, and then he should not kill innocent little birds that are not intended for food for man. I think it is wicked for men to thirst in their souls to kill almost everything which possesses animal life. It is wrong, and I have been surprised at prominent men whom I have seen whose very souls seemed to be athirst for the shedding of animal blood.'" (Gospel Doctrine, 5th ed., Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1939, pp. 265–66.)

-"Is it not an excellent time for man to set the example as the Prophet has said?" President Joseph Fielding Smith asked in 1961.

-Every Fall I watch as thousands of men and women along the Wasatch Front of Northern Utah -- including many active church members -- go to the hills to hunt deer; or pheasants.

I'd say the "why" they do it is the key question.

"And surely, blood shall not be shed, only for meat, to save your lives; and the blood of every beast will I require at your hands," Genesis 9:11, in the Joseph Smith Biblical translation states.

-First and foremost, the meat hunters secure must be 

used.

Secondly, I'd advise hunters to examine their hearts for 

their true motivations. 

Personally I regret killing a few birds and a rockchuck 

as a teenager -- and if I had to kill for my own meat, I 

likely couldn't even bring myself to kill cattle -- unless 

I was starving and so I might be a vegetarian under 

ideal circumstances.

My father used to love pheasant hunting and many of 

my uncles were avid deer hunters, but none of that 

ever appealed to me  ...

-There' s no evidence that meat was eaten before Noah's time -- that is after the Great Flood, so I'm certain there will be no meat eating in the Millennium, when the world returns to Garden of Eden conditions.

Only the Lord will judge us in this regard -- and that's wise as only he knows the intent of a hunter's heart -- and that seems to be the key factor here.

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

Sometimes Temple Work can be simply miraculous, when you least expect it ....

    My wife and son walking to the Rexburg Temple before experiencing a simple "miracle."

IT is October 8, 2014.
I'm heading back from Yellowstone National Park with two family members and we have a plan and the time to visit two temples on the way home for some temple work.
My original plan is to go to the Idaho Falls Temple and then Logan, Utah Temple.
However, as I approach Rexburg, I feel prompted to go there first.
"Why?" I thought. The other two temples are historic.
A strong feeling to go to the Rexburg Temple persists and I finally ask my wife about it. She and then my son agree to do just that.
We enter the temple and inquire if any sealing work is needed. Go upstairs and ask was the reply.
We dress and go upstairs.
A sealing session is in progress. An older woman, who can't hear well, has a list of family names being done. We are quickly invited in -- not a second of waiting here!
We go in and the temple sealer not only pronounces our last name correctly (very rare), but takes particular interest in my son, who leaves on a mission to Hawaii in 5 weeks.
(Also, talking is done very loud for the elderly woman's benefit, another rarity inside any temple.) 
We do some sealing work, marriage and family sealings.
The spiritual feeling was so strong and uplifting that this family wanted ALL their work done as quickly as possible.
Some of the temple patrons in the room had to leave for other commitments. The work only proceeds because we are there.

We were there for a reason, I felt we were called off the freeway to go there and help finish that family's work.
I felt if I would have had the gift of the spirit that involves seeing through the earthly veil that day, that I would have seen happy people around. (Two of my family members not present that day do have that spiritual gift.)
I left the sealing and temple so uplifted and joyous for having done simple work that these deceased people could not do for themselves. Less than an hour commitment in time was all this took.
Yes, visiting Yellowstone on that trip was a treasure, but only of the eye candy variety -- something you could see and appreciate.
At the Rexburg Temple that day, it was what I could NOT see that was so monumental and everlasting though.
Yes, this was a very simply kind of miracle. Nothing earth-shattering, but makes you wonder what other promptings can and should be heard that you don't pick up on because of worldly conflicts and interference?
I should work hard to include temple visits in future vacations and trips.


NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

The 3 Most Unique Temples of All ...

WHAT are the three most uniqueTemples to be found in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
They are the Salt Lake Temple, the Jordan River Temple and the Ogden Temple

Why?

1. The Salt Lake Temple is the flagship temple in the church. 
It required the longest time to be built (40 years) and includes far more symbolism on its exterior than any other temple.

                  The Richard Flygare wedding in the Jordan River Temple.

2. The Jordan River Temple is the ONLY church temple ever built that didn't use any church funds for its construction.
Besides land being donated for its construction to the church (representing the only exception since the 1960s where the church accepted donated land with conditions attached -- that a temple would be build there) -- area members donated $15 million (a price estimated before any plans were drawn up).
The temple actually cost less than that to build (probably $9-10 million)  and so the unused money funded the temple's complete operating costs for several years.
Also, the Jordan River Temple has six endowment ordinance rooms that can seat 125 church members -- the highest capacity endowment temple in the church.

                     A painting of the original Ogden Temple by Keith Wilcox.


3. The Ogden Temple was the first temple in the church to feature six ordinance rooms.
In its first month of operation in 1971, the temple did more endowment work than all other Utah temples combined.
It was also the first temple in the U.S. to feature a film to present the endowment, instead of having to move, room-to-room.
In addition, this is the only temple to be torn down and rebuilt, with just the cornerstone left of the original structure.

                           The "new" Ogden Temple from the west side.

                     The S.E. corner of the rebuilt Ogden Temple.

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

Meat Eating and the Gospel

IS it OK to eat meat as an active member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

Yes, in moderation.

The Church’s “Word of Wisdom” states:

“Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly.”

“And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine.” (Doctrine and Covenants 89:12-13).

It is interesting to note that there was no comma in verse 12, after the word “used” until the 1920s.

I have a copy of a D&C published in 1918 and there is not comma there. Presumably, B.H. Roberts added the comma, when he added footnotes in later editions.

Since the word “only” basically used to mean “except” in the 1800s, the comma was probably warranted, because substituting the word “except” for “only” would have the verse read like this:

“And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, except in times of winter, or of cold, or famine.”

Still, the fact the Lord placed the word “not” into verse 12 is intriguing. Take the word “not” out and the verse pretty much reads with the meaning that the Lord is pleased when you eat meats only in winter, cold or times of famine.

So, one could argue that in today’s world of refrigeration, the winter, cold or famine references may not apply. It did in Joseph Smith’s time for sure, though …

Notwithstanding, the accent on the entire verse is on “sparingly” usage for eating meats.

What does “sparingly” mean?

The Cambridge Dictionary states the meaning of the word is  “using very little of something.”

Indeed, the very day I decided to write this blog, I found this timely tidbit out there:

In an article, “What Science Has to Say About Red Meat,” from Yahoo Health News, Aug. 19, 2014, it advised consumers practice moderation in eating meat.

From increased cancer risk or a higher possibility of heart attack, too much meat is not a good thing,

However, the Lord does not advise being a vegetarian either, at least in the context of preaching publicly NOT to eat meats:

“Any whoso forbiddeth to abstain from meats, that man should not eat the same, is not ordained of God.” (D&C 49:18).

And, the Lord also cautioned against wasting meat or killing for pleasure only:

“And wo be unto man that sheddeth blood or that wasteth flesh and hath no need.” (D&C 49:21).

So, hunting for sport ONLY is not favored by the Lord.

The “Word of Wisdom” itself was originally given as a “greeting” and as a principle with the promise and NOT as a commandment.

Yet, the avoidance of alcohol, coffee, tea, or tobacco is now accepted as a commandment to the Saints, from Brigham Young’s time as prophet to today.

The rest of the Word of Wisdom, including eating meat sparingly, is likely still just good advice from the Lord.

I can find no General Authority discourses where eating meat is discouraged and all official LDS-sponsored dinners I've been to over the decades have included meat on the menu.
(One must also understand that the "Word of Wisdom" isn't purely about health matters. It is also a way the Lord separates his people from the world, by openly have them act differently, by not drinking coffee, for example.)

-In the Millennium, I don’t believe anyone will be eating meats. At the terrestrial world level, animals like the lion will not be meat-eaters, but will lay down with the lamb, safely together. Isaiah 11:7 states that the lion shall eat straw, like the ox, in the millennium.

So, why won’t man too be a vegetarian then?

Man will eat only what he raises in the field for his terrestrial world diet (see Isaiah 65:18-23).

(Myself, if I had to kill game or beasts for my own meat now; that prospect alone would make me a hasty vegetarian.)

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

Ogden Utah Temple Tour

                      The west side of the Ogden Temple, with its reflecting pool.


I went on a tour through the newly renovated Ogden Utah Temple.
Here are my observations/thoughts:

-Fabulous marble floors and lots of dark interior wood. It is like waking inside some heavenly mansion. Seems far more elaborate than the original Ogden Temple. 
(This contrast may also mean the Provo Temple will someday be redone like the Ogden Temple. Both the inside and outside of the Ogden Temple were lacking compared to most other temples.)

-The west lobby of the Ogden Temple is very similar to the lobby at the Bountiful Temple.

-Oodles of stained glass windows everywhere (whereas the former Ogden Temple relied on narrow windows and drapes.

-At least 2 of the 6 ordinance/endowment rooms are very, very tiny. Seems like that shortcoming could equal a longer wait for an endowment session, though. Sure, the former Ogden Temple also had six ordinance rooms, but none were undersized.

-This temple has 7 sealing rooms, with some again very, very small ones.

                                    The main, or east entrance to the Ogden Temple.

-This Temple looks to have 2 operating entrances, an east side and a west side. If you enter from the east side, there is a pullout/drop off half-circle off Washington Boulevard at center block. The west entrance will be by far the busier entrance, with all the parking nearest.

-The reflecting pool on the west side of the temple is likely to be a popular photo op.

-We didn't see the regular dressing rooms on the tour. You went through the bridal dressing areas and got a glimpse of the cafeteria, though.

-The cornerstone is now on the southeast side, (I know for a fact the actual cornerstone and time capsule of the original temple were kept intact.) However, the original Ogden Temple's cornerstone was on the NORTHEAST side and so it was moved. Also, the plaque now has the same wording, but is NOT the original plaque from the old temple.

-One BIG disappointment for me was a lack of artwork of any LOCAL scenes. I know the Calgary, Canada Temple has some paintings of area scenes, so does the Brigham City Temple, the Idaho Falls Temple and others.
The Ogden Temple contains at least one waterfall painting, but it is NOT of Waterfall Canyon or the mouth of Ogden Canyon. There may be several paintings of the local Weber or Ogden River, but they were poorly defined, so who can tell for sure? (Ben Lomond Peak would have made a great inside painting, for example.) 

Query: Why do some temples rate local paintings and others don't?

-Since much of downtown Ogden around the temple has been revitalized, the entire area has a much brighter look and feel.

-The remodeled Ogden Temple looks MORE like a temple than the previous version, that was like something out of a Star Trek scene. This new Temple looks more like a stately monument pointing to heaven, than one that could blast off (previous version of the temple). 
Even non-church members have told me the new version looks like a temple, whereas the former one was simply odd.

                     The temporary tent to host visitors to the Temple Open House.

-The OGDEN TABERNACLE was also refurbished at the same time as the temple. It has nice blue seats now and the walls in general and especially the balcony walls look redone. Looks more like a 21st Century Tabernacle inside than the previous version.
-Also, the weird Tabernacle seating space at the southwest corner, where pillars blocked views, has been totally deleted, so there is likely LESS seating in the Tabernacle than before, say 50-100 seats less.
-A steeple-less Tabernacle still looks odd -- and not as stately or striking as it could be ...


NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.